Language Studies

Aramaic Thoughts

Aramaic Literature - Part 4 - The Talmud on the Sabbath

It is not until Chapter 7 that the Talmud deals with “THE GENERAL RULE CONCERNING THE PRINCIPAL ACTS OF LABOR ON SABBATH.” The preceding chapters are as follows: Chapter 1, as we saw last week, deals with the transfer of objects from one person to another or from one place to another. Chapter 2 treats of the Sabbath and the Hanukah light. That is, there is a special lamp for the Sabbath, and the question is whether the regulations concerning it are understood to apply as well to the Hanukah lights. Chapter 3 concerns stoves, hearths, and ovens, obviously regarding cooking regulations on the Sabbath, and the proper use of cooking gear. Chapter 4 is companion to chapter 3 in that while ch. 3 concerns the utensils for cooking; ch. 4 concerns that which is cooked. Chapter 5 concerns what animals may wear on the Sabbath, that is, whether their owners may put such things as a bridle on them. This is nothing like putting sweaters on lap dogs! Chapter 6 then deals with what women may wear on the Sabbath.

On the matter of Sabbath labor, the Mishnah proposes three primary considerations. The first concerns the person who has forgotten entirely the Sabbath principle and has done many kinds of work on the Sabbath. That person must bring one sin offering. The second case concerns one who knows the Sabbath principle but has forgotten the day and hence has done work on the Sabbath. That person is liable for a sin offering for every Sabbath he has done work on. The third category is the person who remembers the Sabbath principle, and recognizes the day, yet nonetheless performs many acts of work on the Sabbath. He is responsible for a sin offering for every act of work he performed. Finally, it lays down the general consideration that “One who committed many acts all emanating from one principal act is liable for but one sin-offering.” (Cited from http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/t01/t0115.htm). This helpfully lays out the underlying principle that explains the decisions. The first category of person has committed the one principal act of forgetting the Sabbath principle. Hence, he is liable for only one sin offering. The second man has committed the principle act of forgetting the particular day, so he is liable for a sin offering for each particular day he has violated. The third man has committed the principle act of intending knowingly to work on the Sabbath, hence he is liable for a sin offering for every single act of work he committed on that day.

The Talmudic discussion then begins to delve into what constitutes a forgetting of the Sabbath principle, the Sabbath day, etc. The debate arises regarding a child (presumably Jewish) who for whatever reason is raised in non-Jewish circumstances. Is that person regarded as one who forgot, or not? Some rabbis said that such a person falls under the category of one who forgot. Others said that the category of forgetting applies only to one who knew it and subsequently forgot, whereas a child raised in such circumstances never knew, and is hence free from the regulation.

The discussion continues next week.

Copyright Statement
'Aramaic Thoughts' Copyright 2024© Benjamin Shaw. 'Aramaic Thoughts' articles may be reproduced in whole under the following provisions: 1) A proper credit must be given to the author at the end of each story, along with a link to https://www.studylight.org/language-studies/aramaic-thoughts.html  2) 'Aramaic Thoughts' content may not be arranged or "mirrored" as a competitive online service.