Study Shabbat folio 100B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
לאו היינו מתניתין, ואמר רבי יוחנן: והוא שנח על גבי משהו. אמר ליה: מתגלגל קאמרת — מתגלגל אין סופו לנוח, אבל האי כיון דסופו לנוח, אף על גב דלא נח — כמאן דנח דמי, קא משמע לן.
Isn’t that what we learned in the Mishnah, with regard to which R' Yoḥanan said: That liability is when it came to rest atop something, which means that the object must actually land in order for the one who threw it to be liable. Mareimar said to Ravina: Are you saying it is a case of rolling? One cannot cite proof from a rolling object because a rolling object will not ultimately come to rest. However, with regard to this object, which passed within 3 handbreadths of the ground, I would say: Since it will ultimately come to rest, even though it has not yet come to rest, it is considered as an object that came to rest. Therefore, Rava teaches us that even in that case one is not liable until it actually comes to rest upon something.
מתני׳ הזורק בים ארבע אמות — פטור. אם היה רקק מים, ורשות הרבים מהלכת בו, הזורק לתוכו ארבע אמות — חייב. וכמה הוא רקק מים — פחות מעשרה טפחים. רקק מים ורשות הרבים מהלכת בו, הזורק בתוכו ארבע אמות — חייב.
Mishnah: One who throws an object 4 cubits into the sea is exempt. If there was a swamp and the public domain passes through it, one who throws an object 4 cubits into it is liable like one who carried 4 cubits in the public domain. And how deep is this swamp? It is less than 10 handbreadths deep. In the case of a swamp that the public domain passes through, one who throws an object 4 cubits into the swamp is liable.
גמ׳ אמר ליה ההוא מרבנן לרבא: בשלמא ״הילוך״ ״הילוך״ תרי זימני, הא קא משמע לן: הילוך על ידי הדחק — שמיה הילוך, תשמיש על ידי הדחק — לא שמיה תשמיש. אלא ״רקק״ ״רקק״ תרי זימני למה לי? חד בימות החמה וחד בימות הגשמים. וצריכי. דאי תנא חדא, הוה אמינא הני מילי בימות החמה, דעבידי אינשי דמסגי לאקורי נפשייהו, אבל בימות הגשמים — לא. ואי אשמעינן בימות הגשמים, דכיון דמיטנפי לא איכפת להו, אבל בימות החמה — לא.
Talmud: One of the rabbis said to Rava: Granted, passing passing is mentioned twice in the Mishnah; this teaches us that passage under duress is considered passage, but usage under duress is not considered usage. But why do I need it to mention swamp swamp twice? Rava answered him: One case is referring to the summer, and one case is referring to the winter. And both cases are necessary, as had the Mishnah taught only one mention of swamp, I would have said that these matters, i.e., cases indicating that passage under duress is considered passage, apply only in the summer because people commonly pass through the swamp to cool themselves; however, in the winter I would have thought that it would not be so. And had the Mishnah taught us only the case of winter, I would have said that since they are filthy from mud anyway, they do not mind walking through the swamp, but in the summer it would not be so.