שֶׁזָּנוּ עֵינֵיהֶם מִן הָעֶרְוָה.

they nourished their eyes from nakedness.

אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: מִפְּנֵי מָה מָנָה הַכָּתוּב תַּכְשִׁיטִין שֶׁבַּחוּץ עִם תַּכְשִׁיטִין שֶׁבִּפְנִים – לוֹמַר לְךָ: כֹּל הַמִּסְתַּכֵּל בְּאֶצְבַּע קְטַנָּה שֶׁל אִשָּׁה – כְּאִילּוּ מִסְתַּכֵּל בִּמְקוֹם הַתּוּרְפָּה.

With regard to the verse that lists the ornaments, Rav Sheshet said: For what reason did the verse list outer ornaments, i.e., a bracelet, with inner ornaments, i.e., a kumaz ? To tell you that anyone who gazes upon a woman’s little finger is considered as if he gazed upon her naked genitals. The atonement was for the sin of looking.

מתני׳ יוֹצְאָה אִשָּׁה בְּחוּטֵי שֵׂעָר, בֵּין מִשֶּׁלָּהּ, בֵּין מִשֶּׁל חֲבֶירְתָּהּ, בֵּין מִשֶּׁל בְּהֵמָה.

The mishna continues to discuss those items with which it is permitted to go out and those items with which it is prohibited to go out on Shabbat. A woman may go out with strands of hair that she put on her head, whether they are from her own hair that she made into a wig, or whether they are from the hair of another, or whether they are from the hair of an animal.

וּבַטּוֹטֶפֶת וּבְסַרְבִיטִין בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵן תְּפוּרִין,

And a woman may go out with an ornament called totefet , and with sarvitin when they are sewn and will not fall.

בַּכָּבוּל וּבְפֵאָה נָכְרִית לֶחָצֵר. בְּמוֹךְ שֶׁבְּאָזְנָהּ, וּבְמוֹךְ שֶׁבְּסַנְדָּלָהּ, וּבְמוֹךְ שֶׁהִתְקִינָה לְנִדָּתָהּ.

She may go out on Shabbat with a woolen cap or with a wig to the courtyard, although not to the public domain. And likewise she may go out with a cloth that is in her ear, and with a cloth in her sandal, and with a cloth that she placed due to her menstrual status.

בַּפִּילְפֵּל, וּבְגַּלְגַּל מֶלַח, וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁנִּיתָּן לְתוֹךְ פִּיהָ, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא תִּתֵּן לְכַתְּחִלָּה בַּשַּׁבָּת. וְאִם נָפַל – לֹא תַּחֲזִיר.

She may go out on Shabbat with pepper, or with a grain of salt, or anything placed in her mouth for healing or for preventing bad odor, as long as she does not put these objects in her mouth for the first time on Shabbat. And if it fell out she may not replace it.

שֵׁן תּוֹתֶבֶת, שֵׁן שֶׁל זָהָב, רַבִּי מַתִּיר, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִים.

A false tooth as well as (Ramban) a gold tooth, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits going out with it, and the Rabbis prohibit doing so.

גמ׳ וּצְרִיכָא: דְּאִי אַשְׁמַעִינַן דִּידָהּ – מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא מְאִיס, אֲבָל חֲבֶירְתָּהּ דִּמְאִיס – אֵימָא לָא,

We learned in the mishna that a woman may go out with different strands of hair. The Gemara comments: And it is necessary to cite all of the cases. If the mishna taught us only with regard to her own hair, I would have said that she may go out with it because it is not repulsive, as it is her own hair; therefore, there is no concern lest she come to remove the strands and carry them in the public domain. However, the hair of another, which is repulsive and a different color from hers, say no, she may not go out with it, due to concern lest she be embarrassed, remove it, and come to carry it in the public domain.

וְאִי אַשְׁמַעִינַן דַּחֲבֶירְתָּהּ – דְּבַת מִינָהּ הוּא, אֲבָל דִּבְהֵמָה – לָאו בַּר מִינָהּ הוּא, אֵימָא לָא – צְרִיכָא.

And if the mishna taught us that she is permitted to go out with the hair of another, I would have said that she may go out with it because it is hair of her own kind. Therefore, it is not repulsive in her eyes and she will not come to remove it. However, the hair of an animal, since it is not of her own kind, say no, she may not go out with it due to concern lest she remove it. Therefore, it is necessary to cite all three cases.

תָּנָא: וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא תֵּצֵא יַלְדָּה בְּשֶׁל זְקֵנָה, וּזְקֵנָה בְּשֶׁל יַלְדָּה.

It was taught in the Tosefta : It is permitted as long as a girl does not go out with the hair of an elderly woman, and an elderly woman does not go out with the hair of a girl.

בִּשְׁלָמָא זְקֵנָה בְּשֶׁל יַלְדָּה – שֶׁבַח הוּא לָהּ, אֶלָּא יַלְדָּה בְּשֶׁל זְקֵנָה אַמַּאי? גְּנַאי הוּא לָהּ! אַיְּידֵי דִּתְנָא “זְקֵנָה בְּשֶׁל יַלְדָּה״ תְּנָא נַמִי “יַלְדָּה בְּשֶׁל זְקֵנָה״.

The Gemara challenges: Granted, the Gemara cited the case of an elderly woman who goes out with the hair of a girl, as it is a reasonable scenario because it is flattering for her to look young. However, why would a girl go out with the hair of an elderly woman? Since it is demeaning for her to appear elderly, it is an unlikely scenario. The Gemara answers: Since the mishna taught the case of an elderly woman with the hair of a girl, it also taught the improbable case of a girl with the hair of an elderly woman.

“בַּכָּבוּל וּבְפֵאָה נָכְרִית לֶחָצֵר״. אָמַר רַב: כֹּל שֶׁאָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים לָצֵאת בּוֹ לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים – אָסוּר לָצֵאת בּוֹ לֶחָצֵר, חוּץ מִכָּבוּל וּפֵאָה נָכְרִית.

It was taught in the mishna that a woman may go out with a woolen cap or with a wig to the courtyard. Rav said: With regard to all ornaments and garments with which the Sages prohibited going out into the public domain on Shabbat, it is also prohibited to go out with them into the courtyard due to the concern lest she forget and go out to the street, with the exception of a woolen cap and a wig.

רַבִּי עֲנָנִי בַּר שָׂשׂוֹן מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר: הַכֹּל כַּכָּבוּל.

Rabbi Anani bar Sason said in the name of Rabbi Yishmael: All ornaments have the same legal status as a woolen cap and may be worn into the courtyard.

תְּנַן: בַּכָּבוּל וּבְפֵאָה נָכְרִית לֶחָצֵר. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַב – נִיחָא, אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי עֲנָנִי בַּר שָׂשׂוֹן קַשְׁיָא! רַבִּי עֲנָנִי בַּר שָׂשׂוֹן מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּמַאן קָאָמַר לֵיהּ – מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בַּר יוֹסֵי, רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בַּר יוֹסֵי תַּנָּא הוּא וּפָלֵיג.

We learned in the mishna that it is permitted to go out with a woolen cap or a wig into the courtyard. Granted, according to the opinion of Rav the matter works out well, as the mishna allows one to go out into a courtyard only with a woolen cap and a wig. However, according to the opinion of Rabbi Anani bar Sason, it is difficult. The Gemara answers: In whose name did Rabbi Anani bar Sason say his halakha ? In the name of Rabbi Yishmael bar Yosei, and Rabbi Yishmael bar Yosei is a tanna and, as such, has the authority to dispute the determination in the mishna.

וְרַב, מַאי שְׁנָא הָנֵי? אָמַר עוּלָּא: כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּתְגַּנֶּה עַל בַּעְלָהּ. כִּדְתַנְיָא: “וְהַדָּוָה בְּנִדָּתָהּ״, זְקֵנִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים אָמְרוּ: שֶׁלֹּא תִּכְחוֹל וְלֹא תִּפְקוֹס וְלֹא תִּתְקַשֵּׁט בְּבִגְדֵי צִבְעוֹנִין, עַד שֶׁבָּא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְלִימֵּד: אִם כֵּן אַתָּה מְגַנָּהּ עַל בַּעְלָהּ, וְנִמְצָא בַּעְלָהּ מְגָרְשָׁהּ. אֶלָּא מַה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר “וְהַדָּוָה בְּנִדָּתָהּ״ – בְּנִדָּתָהּ תְּהֵא עַד שֶׁתָּבֹא בַּמַּיִם.

The Gemara asks: And according to Rav, what is different about these, the woolen cap and the wig, that the mishna permitted going out into the courtyard with them? Ulla said: So that she will not become unappealing to her husband. That would be the result if all ornamentation was prohibited. As it was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “And of her that is sick in her menstrual status [ niddata ]” (Leviticus 15:33), the Elders of the early generations said that this verse comes to teach us that the menstruating woman should be distanced from her husband in all senses, like a person ostracized [ menudeh ] by the Sages. This includes that she may not paint her eyes blue , and she may not rouge [ pokeset ] her face, and she may not adorn herself with colorful clothing. Until Rabbi Akiva came and taught: If you do so, you are making her unappealing to her husband, and her husband will consequently divorce her. Therefore, extreme strictures should not be instituted. Rather, what is the meaning of that which the verse states: “And of her that is sick in her menstrual status”? She shall remain prohibited in her menstrual status even after the flow of blood has stopped until she immerses in the water of a ritual bath.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁאָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן – אֲפִילּוּ בְּחַדְרֵי חֲדָרִים אָסוּר.

Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Wherever the Sages prohibited an action due to the appearance of prohibition, even in the innermost chambers, where no one will see it, it is prohibited. When prohibiting an action, the Sages did not distinguish between different circumstances. They prohibited performing the action in all cases.

תְּנַן: וְלֹא בַּזּוּג אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁפָּקוּק, וְתַנְיָא אִידָךְ: פּוֹקֵק לָהּ זוּג בְּצַוָּארָהּ וּמְטַיֵּיל עִמָּה בֶּחָצֵר!

The Gemara raises an objection. We learned in the mishna that an animal belonging to a Jew may not go out on Shabbat with a bell around its neck, even though it is plugged and makes no sound, due to the appearance of prohibition, as it appears as if he were taking the animal to the marketplace. And it was taught in another baraita : He may plug the bell on the animal’s neck and walk with it in the courtyard. Apparently, although the Sages prohibited this action due to the appearance of prohibition, they permitted it in the courtyard.

תַּנָּאֵי הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא:

The Gemara answers: It is subject to a dispute between tanna’im in this matter, as it was taught in a baraita :