Study Shabbat folio 5A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
לא מחייב רבי אלא ברשות היחיד מקורה, דאמרינן: ביתא כמאן דמליא דמיא. אבל שאינו מקורה — לא.
R' Yehuda HaNasi only deemed him liable in the covered private domain, with a roof, as we say: The house is considered as one that is full? The entire house with all its space is considered one unit, and each part of it is considered as if it is filled with actual objects. Therefore, an object passing through the house is considered as if it landed on an actual surface of at least 4 by 4 handbreadths. However, in a private domain that is not covered, R' Yehuda HaNasi does not deem him liable.
וכי תימא הכא נמי במקורה — התינח ברשות היחיד מקורה, ברשות הרבים מקורה מי חייב? והאמר רב שמואל בר יהודה אמר רבי אבא אמר רב הונא אמר רב: המעביר חפץ ארבע אמות ברשות הרבים מקורה, פטור — לפי שאינו דומה לדגלי מדבר.
And if you say: Here too our Mishnah is speaking about a covered domain, and therefore the lifting from and the placing on the hand are considered as if they were performed in a place that is 4 handbreadths; granted, in a covered private domain lifting from and placing in a hand are considered as if it were lifted from and placed onto an area of 4 by 4 handbreadths, but in a covered public domain is he liable at all? Didn’t Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda say that R' Abba said that Rav Huna said that Rav said: One who carries an object 4 cubits from place to place in a covered public domain, even though transferring an object 4 cubits in the public domain is like carrying out from one domain to another and prohibited by Torah law, in this case, he is not liable? The reason is that since the covered public domain is not similar to the banners in the desert, i.e., the area in which the banners of the tribes of Israel passed in the desert. The labors prohibited on Shabbat are derived from the labors that were performed in the building of the Tabernacle during the encampment of Israel in the desert, and the desert was most definitely not covered. Consequently, even according to R' Yehuda HaNasi’s opinion, it is impossible to explain that our Mishnah is referring to the case of a covered public domain.