text:
Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day
Yehoshua B. Gordon - Rambam: Shabbat, Chapter 22 (49:18)
Rabbi Avraham Meyer Zajac - Short Insight: Shabbat ch.22 (5:10)
SIE Rambam - 22nd Perek: Laws of Shabbos (37:32)
Although removing a loaf [of bread from the side of an oven] does not involve a [forbidden] labor, our Sages forbade doing so, lest one be prompted to bake.1
If one stuck a loaf to [the side of] an oven before the commencement of the Sabbath, and afterwards the Sabbath began, one may remove enough for three meals. Similarly, one may tell others, "Come and take for yourselves."2 Although removing a loaf does not involve a [forbidden] labor, in this situation, when one removes a loaf, one should not do so with a baker's peel, but rather with a knife, in order to deviate from one's ordinary procedure.
רְדִיַּת הַפַּת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְלָאכָה אָסְרוּ אוֹתָהּ חֲכָמִים שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא לֶאֱפוֹת. הַמַּדְבִּיק פַּת בַּתַּנּוּר מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם וְקָדַשׁ עָלָיו הַיּוֹם מַצִּיל מִמֶּנָּה מָזוֹן שָׁלֹשׁ סְעֻדּוֹת וְאוֹמֵר לַאֲחֵרִים בּוֹאוּ וְהַצִּילוּ לָכֶם. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהָרְדִיָּה אֵינָהּ מְלָאכָה כְּשֶׁהוּא מַצִּיל לֹא יִרְדֶּה בְּמִרְדֶּה אֶלָּא בְּסַכִּין כְּדֵי לְשַׁנּוֹת:
Why did the Sages forbid entering a bathhouse on the Sabbath?3 Because the attendants would heat up water on the Sabbath, and say that it has been heated before the commencement of the Sabbath. For this reason, our Sages decreed that one should not enter a bathhouse4 on the Sabbath, even to use [merely] as a steam bath.5
Similarly, they decreed that a person should not rinse his entire body with hot water6 - even if the water was heated on Friday. One may, however, wash one's face, hands, and feet7 [with hot water that was heated before the commencement of the Sabbath]. When do the above [restrictions] apply? To water that is heated by fire. One may, however, rinse one's entire body in the hot springs of Tiberias and the like.8
It is forbidden to bathe in hot springs located in caves, for the cave is filled with hot air, and one will sweat [as in a steam bath].9 Thus, it resembles a bathhouse.
מִפְּנֵי מָה אָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים לִכָּנֵס בַּמֶּרְחָץ בְּשַׁבָּת. מִפְּנֵי הַבַּלָּנִין שֶׁהָיוּ מְחִמִּין חַמִּין בְּשַׁבָּת וְאוֹמְרִין מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת הוּחַמּוּ. לְפִיכָךְ גָּזְרוּ שֶׁלֹּא יִכָּנֵס אָדָם לַמֶּרְחָץ בְּשַׁבָּת אֲפִלּוּ לְהַזִּיעַ. וְגָזְרוּ שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁתַּטֵּף כָּל גּוּפוֹ בְּחַמִּין וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּחַמִּין שֶׁהוּחַמּוּ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת. אֲבָל פָּנָיו יָדָיו וְרַגְלָיו מֻתָּר. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּחַמֵּי הָאוּר גְּזֵרָה מִשּׁוּם מֶרְחָץ. אֲבָל בְּחַמֵּי טְבֶרְיָא וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן מֻתָּר לְהִשְׁתַּטֵּף בָּהֶן כָּל גּוּפוֹ. וְאָסוּר לִרְחֹץ בְּמַיִם חַמִּין שֶׁבַּמְּעָרוֹת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַמְּעָרָה יֵשׁ בָּהּ הֶבֶל וְיָבוֹא לִידֵי זֵעָה וְנִמְצֵאת כְּמֶרְחָץ:
A person may warm himself before a fire and then go out and rinse his entire body in cold water. He may not, however, rinse his entire body in cold water10 and then warm himself by a fire. By doing so, the water on his body will become lukewarm, and it would be as if he washed his entire body in warm water.11
When a person causes a duct of cold water to pass through hot water,12 even water coming from the hot springs of Tiberias, the water is considered as if it was heated [by fire] on the Sabbath13 and one is forbidden to wash in it or drink it.
מִתְחַמֵּם אָדָם כְּנֶגֶד הַמְּדוּרָה וְיוֹצֵא וּמִשְׁתַּטֵּף כָּל גּוּפוֹ בְּצוֹנֵן. אֲבָל אֵינוֹ מִשְׁתַּטֵּף כָּל גּוּפוֹ בְּצוֹנֵן וּמִתְחַמֵּם כְּנֶגֶד הַמְּדוּרָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּפְשִׁיר מַיִם שֶׁעָלָיו וְנִמְצָא כְּרוֹחֵץ כָּל גּוּפוֹ בְּחַמִּין. הַמֵּבִיא סִילוֹן שֶׁל צוֹנֵן בְּתוֹךְ מַיִם חַמִּין אֲפִלּוּ בְּתוֹךְ חַמֵּי טְבֶרְיָא הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כְּחַמִּין שֶׁהוּחַמּוּ בְּשַׁבָּת וַאֲסוּרִין בִּרְחִיצָה וּבִשְׁתִיָּה:
A person may bring a cask of water and place it in front of a fire, not in order that it will be warmed, but to dispel its chill. Similarly, one may place a flask of oil in front of a fire so that it will become lukewarm, but not so that it will be heated.14
A person may dip his hand in water or oil and warm it in front of a fire,15 provided the water [or oil] on his hand will not become so hot that it could burn an infant's belly.16 One may warm a cloth and place it on one's stomach on the Sabbath.
מֵבִיא אָדָם קִיתוֹן שֶׁל מַיִם וּמַנִּיחוֹ כְּנֶגֶד הַמְּדוּרָה לֹא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיֵּחַמּוּ אֶלָּא כְּדֵי שֶׁתָּפוּג צִנָּתָן. וְכֵן מַנִּיחַ פַּךְ שֶׁל שֶׁמֶן כְּנֶגֶד הַמְּדוּרָה כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּפְשַׁר לֹא שֶׁיֵּחַם. וְסָךְ אָדָם יָדוֹ בְּמַיִם אוֹ בְּשֶׁמֶן וּמְחַמֵּם כְּנֶגֶד הַמְּדוּרָה. וְהוּא שֶׁלֹּא יֵחַמּוּ הַמַּיִם שֶׁעַל יָדוֹ עַד שֶׁתְּהֵא כְּרֵסוֹ שֶׁל תִּינוֹק נִכְוֵית בָּהֶן. וּמְחַמֵּם בֶּגֶד וּמַנִּיחוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי מֵעַיִם בְּשַׁבָּת:
We may not place cold water in a tub in a bathhouse17 that is filled with hot water, for [the cold water] will become very hot.18 Similarly, one may not place a flask of oil in such a tub, for it is considered as if one is cooking it.19 One may, however, place hot water in a tub of cold water.20
אַמְבְּטִי שֶׁל מֶרְחָץ שֶׁהִיא מְלֵאָה מַיִם חַמִּים אֵין נוֹתְנִין לָהּ מַיִם צוֹנֵן שֶׁהֲרֵי מְחַמְּמָן הַרְבֵּה. וְכֵן לֹא יִתֵּן לְתוֹכָהּ פַּךְ שֶׁל שֶׁמֶן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כִּמְבַשְּׁלוֹ. אֲבָל נוֹתֵן הוּא מַיִם חַמִּין לְתוֹךְ אַמְבְּטִי שֶׁל צוֹנֵן:
After hot water was removed from a cooking urn, it is permitted to pour in cold water so that it will become lukewarm.21 It is permitted to pour hot water22 into cold water or cold water into hot water,23 provided [the hot water] is not in a vessel that was cooked on a fire,24 since this will raise the temperature [of the cold water] greatly.
Similarly, when a pot is boiling, one should not place spices in it, even after one has removed it from the fire.25 One may, however, salt it, since salt cooks only on a very large flame.26 If one poured the food from a pot to a bowl, one may place spices on it, even if it is boiling, since a vessel into which food has been poured does not [possess sufficient heat to] cook.27
מֵיחַם שֶׁפִּנָּה מִמֶּנּוּ מַיִם חַמִּין מֻתָּר לִתֵּן לְתוֹכוֹ מַיִם צוֹנֵן כְּדֵי לְהַפְשִׁירָן. וּמֻתָּר לִצֹּק מַיִם חַמִּין לְתוֹךְ מַיִם צוֹנֵן אוֹ צוֹנֵן לְתוֹךְ הַחַמִּין וְהוּא שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיוּ בִּכְלִי רִאשׁוֹן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְחַמְּמָן הַרְבֵּה. וְכֵן קְדֵרָה רוֹתַחַת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוֹרִידָהּ מֵעַל הָאֵשׁ לֹא יִתֵּן לְתוֹכָהּ תַּבְלִין אֲבָל נוֹתֵן לְתוֹכָהּ מֶלַח שֶׁהַמֶּלַח אֵינוֹ מִתְבַּשֵּׁל אֶלָּא עַל גַּבֵּי אֵשׁ גְּדוֹלָה. וְאִם יָצַק הַתַּבְשִׁיל מִקְּדֵרָה לִקְעָרָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא רוֹתֵחַ בַּקְּעָרָה מֻתָּר לוֹ לִתֵּן לְתוֹךְ הַקְּעָרָה תַּבְלִין שֶׁכְּלִי שֵׁנִי אֵינוֹ מְבַשֵּׁל:
[On the Sabbath,] we may not place chiltit28 in hot water nor in cold water to soak.29 One may, however, soak it in vinegar. If one drank chiltit on Thursday and on Friday, one may soak it in cold water on the Sabbath, place it in the sun to warm, and drink it, lest ceasing to drink it cause one to become sick.30
אֵין שׁוֹרִין אֶת הַחִלְתִּית בֵּין בְּפוֹשְׁרִין בֵּין בְּצוֹנֵן אֲבָל שׁוֹרֶה אוֹתוֹ בְּתוֹךְ הַחֹמֶץ. וְאִם שָׁתָהוּ בְּיוֹם חֲמִישִׁי וְשִׁשִּׁי הֲרֵי זֶה שׁוֹרֶה בְּשַׁבָּת בְּצוֹנֵן וּמַנִּיחוֹ בַּחַמָּה עַד שֶׁיֵּחַם וְשׁוֹתֶה. כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יֶחֱלֶה אִם פָּסַק מִלִּשְׁתּוֹת:
When food has been cooked before the Sabbath or soaked in hot water before the Sabbath, one is permitted to soak it in hot water on the Sabbath even though it is presently cold.31
Although food is cold, and it had never been placed in hot water previously, it may be rinsed in hot water on the Sabbath,32 if this rinsing does not complete its preparation.33 One may not, however, soak it for the first time on the Sabbath.34
דָּבָר שֶׁנִתְבַּשֵּׁל קֹדֶם הַשַּׁבָּת אוֹ נִשְׁרָה בְּחַמִּין מִלִּפְנֵי הַשַּׁבָּת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא עַכְשָׁו צוֹנֵן מֻתָּר לִשְׁרוֹתוֹ בְּחַמִּין בְּשַׁבָּת. וְדָבָר שֶׁהוּא צוֹנֵן מֵעִקָּרוֹ וְלֹא בָּא בְּחַמִּין מֵעוֹלָם מְדִיחִין אוֹתוֹ בְּחַמִּין בְּשַׁבָּת אִם לֹא הָיְתָה הֲדָחָתוֹ גְּמַר מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲבָל אֵין שׁוֹרִין אוֹתוֹ בְּחַמִּין:
Although it is forbidden to heat [food or water] using substances that derive their heat from the sun,35 it is permitted to heat [them] in the heat of the sun itself, for one will not err between the sun and fire.36 Therefore, it is permitted to place water in the sun to warm.37
Similarly, we may place [a bottle of] pleasant water into [a pool of] stagnant water so that it cool.38 Similarly, we may place a [dish of] cooked food into a cistern to preserve it.39
מֻתָּר לְהָחֵם בַּחַמָּה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָסוּר לְהָחֵם בְּתוֹלְדוֹת חַמָּה שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָּא לִטְעוֹת מֵחַמָּה לְאוּר. לְפִיכָךְ מֻתָּר לִתֵּן מַיִם צוֹנֵן בַּשֶּׁמֶשׁ כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵּחַמּוּ. וְכֵן נוֹתְנִין מַיִם יָפִים לְתוֹךְ מַיִם רָעִים בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיֵּצַנּוּ. וְנוֹתְנִין תַּבְשִׁיל לְתוֹךְ הַבּוֹר בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיְּהֵא שָׁמוּר:
A person may mix water, salt and oil, and dip his bread in the mixture or pour it onto cooked food. This is permitted provided one makes only a small amount.40 Making a large amount is forbidden,41 for it appears that one is performing one of the labors associated with cooking. Similarly, one may not make strong salt water42 - i.e., two thirds salt and one third water - for it would appear as if one is making fish-brine.43
One may salt an egg, but not radishes and the like,44 because it would appear that one is pickling food on the Sabbath. Pickling is forbidden, because it is as though one is cooking.45 One may, however, dip radishes and the like into salt and eat them [directly afterwards].46
מְעָרֵב אָדָם מַיִם וּמֶלַח וְשֶׁמֶן וְטוֹבֵל בּוֹ פִּתּוֹ אוֹ נוֹתְנוֹ לְתוֹךְ הַתַּבְשִׁיל. וְהוּא שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה מְעַט אֲבָל הַרְבֵּה אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה מִמְּלֶאכֶת הַתַּבְשִׁיל. וְכֵן לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה מֵי מֶלַח עַזִּין וְהֵן שְׁנֵי שְׁלִישֵׁי מֶלַח וּשְׁלִישׁ מַיִם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּעוֹשֶׂה מוּרְיָס. וּמֻתָּר לִמְלֹחַ בֵּיצָה אֲבָל צְנוֹן וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּכוֹבֵשׁ כְּבָשִׁים בְּשַׁבָּת וְהַכּוֹבֵשׁ אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כִּמְבַשֵּׁל. וּמֻתָּר לִטְבּל צְנוֹן וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ בְּמֶלַח וְאוֹכֵל:
One may mix wine, honey, and peppers together47 on the Sabbath to partake of them. Wine, water, and balsam oil are forbidden to be mixed, because this mixture is not fit to be eaten by healthy people.48
מֻתָּר לְעָרֵב יַיִן וּדְבַשׁ וּפִלְפְּלִין בְּשַׁבָּת לְאָכְלָן אֲבָל יַיִן וּמַיִם וְשֶׁמֶן אֲפַרְסְמוֹן אָסוּר שֶׁאֵין זֶה רָאוּי לַאֲכִילַת בְּרִיאִים. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
When mustard has been mixed on Friday, one may blend49 it [on the Sabbath] by hand or with a utensil50 and add honey to it. One may not stir it forcefully,51 however; [all that is permitted is to] mix it.
Oil, vinegar, and spices may be added [on the Sabbath] to cress52that was stirred on Friday. One may not stir the mixture] forcefully, however; [all that is permitted is to] mix in [these ingredients]. Garlic that was crushed on Friday may be placed into groats on the Sabbath. One may not grind [the mixture]; [all that is permitted is to] mix in [the garlic].
חַרְדָּל שֶׁלָּשׁוֹ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת לְמָחָר מְמַחוֹ בֵּין בְּיָד בֵּין בִּכְלִי וְנוֹתֵן לְתוֹכוֹ דְּבַשׁ וְלֹא יִטְרֹף אֶלָּא מְעָרֵב. שַׁחֲלַיִם שֶׁטְּרָפָן מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת לְמָחָר נוֹתֵן לְתוֹכוֹ שֶׁמֶן וְחֹמֶץ וְתַבְלִין וְלֹא יִטְרֹף אֶלָּא מְעָרֵב. שׁוּם שֶׁרִסְּקוֹ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת לְמָחָר נוֹתְנוֹ לְתוֹךְ הַגְּרִיסִין וְלֹא יִשְׁחֹק אֶלָּא מְעָרֵב:
A person who removes hair from a person's body is liable for [performing a derivative of the forbidden labor of] shearing.53 Therefore, it is forbidden to wash one's hands with a substance that will without doubt remove hair - e.g., ohaloh54 and the like.55
One may cleanse one's hands with frankincense powder, pepper powder, jasmine powder, and the like, without concern that one might remove the hair on one's hands, for this is not one's intent.56
[The following rules apply when] one mixes a substance that will undoubtedly remove hair together with a substance that will not necessarily remove hair: If the majority [of the mixture] is composed of a substance that will undoubtedly remove hair, it is forbidden to clean one's hands with it.57 If not, it is permitted.
הַנּוֹטֵל שֵׂעָר מִגּוּף הָאָדָם חַיָּב מִשּׁוּם גּוֹזֵז. לְפִיכָךְ אָסוּר לִרְחֹץ אֶת הַיָּדַיִם בִּדְבַר שֶׁמַּשִּׁיר אֶת הַשֵּׂעָר וַדַּאי כְּגוֹן אָהֳלָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ. וּמֻתָּר לָחֹף אֶת הַיָּדַיִם בַּעֲפַר לְבוֹנָה וַעֲפַר פִּלְפְּלִין וַעֲפַר יַסְמִין וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא יַשִּׁיר שֵׂעָר שֶׁעַל יָדוֹ שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינוֹ מִתְכַּוֵּן. עֵרֵב דָּבָר שֶׁמַּשִּׁיר אֶת הַשֵּׂעָר וַדַּאי עִם דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַשִּׁיר וַדַּאי אִם הָיָה הָרֹב מִדָּבָר הַמַּשִּׁיר אָסוּר לָחֹף בּוֹ וְאִם לָאו מֻתָּר:
One may not look at oneself in a mirror of [polished] metal on the Sabbath. [This is] a decree [enacted] lest one use it to remove loose hanging strands of hair.58 This applies even if the mirror is affixed to the wall.59 One may, by contrast, look at oneself in a mirror that is not made of metal, even if it is not affixed [to a wall].60
אָסוּר לִרְאוֹת בְּמַרְאָה שֶׁל מַתֶּכֶת בְּשַׁבָּת גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יַשִּׁיר בָּהּ נִימִין הַמְדֻלְדָּלִין מִן הַשֵּׂעָר וַאֲפִלּוּ קָבוּעַ בַּכֹּתֶל. אֲבָל מַרְאָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ שֶׁל מַתֶּכֶת מֻתָּר לִרְאוֹת בָּהּ אֲפִלּוּ אֵינָהּ קְבוּעָה:
A person who launders is liable for [performing a derivative of the forbidden labor of] whitening, and one who wrings out a garment is liable because he is [performing one of the activities involved in] laundering.61 Therefore, it is forbidden to press a piece of cloth, unprocessed fabric, or the like into the opening of a flask to plug it, lest one squeeze62 liquids from it.63
One may not clean with a sponge unless it has a handle, lest one squeeze [water from it].64 One may not cover a jug of water65 or the like with a cloth that is not set aside for this purpose. [This is] a decree [enacted] lest one squeeze [water from it].66
הַמְכַבֵּס חַיָּב מִשּׁוּם מְלַבֵּן. וְהַסּוֹחֵט כְּסוּת חַיָּב מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְכַבֵּס. לְפִיכָךְ אָסוּר לִדְחֹק מַטְלִית אוֹ מוֹךְ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן בְּפִי הָאֲשִׁישָׁה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ כְּדֵי לְסָתְמָהּ שֶׁמָּא יָבֹא לִידֵי סְחִיטָה. וְאֵין מְקַנְּחִין בִּסְפוֹג אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן יֵשׁ לוֹ בֵּית אֲחִיזָה שֶׁלֹּא יִסְחֹט. וְאֵין מְכַסִּין חָבִית שֶׁל מַיִם וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ בְּבֶגֶד שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוּכָן לָהּ גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִסְחֹט:
When a cask [of liquids] breaks67 on the Sabbath, one may save what one needs for oneself and one's guests on the Sabbath,68 provided one does not sponge up wine with a sponge69 or scoop up oil with his hands.70 [These restrictions were instituted, because] were one allowed to follow one's ordinary weekday practice, there is the possibility that one would squeeze [the liquids from it].
How must he save [the liquid]? He should bring a container and place it under [the liquid].71 He may not bring one container to catch [the liquid] in the air, and another into which to collect [the liquid]. This [restriction] is a decree, lest one carry a container through the public domain.
[An exception is made] if guests unexpectedly arrive. [In this instance,] he may bring one container to catch [the liquid] in the air, another into which to collect [the liquid], and then combine it with the first. He should not collect [the liquid] and then invite guests. Instead, he should invite guests and then collect [the liquid]. If one acts with guile in this matter,72 it is permitted.73
נִשְׁבְּרָה לוֹ חָבִית בְּשַׁבָּת מַצִּיל מִמֶּנָּה מַה שֶּׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לְשַׁבָּת לוֹ וּלְאוֹרְחָיו וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יִסְפֹּג בְּיַיִן אוֹ יְטַפַּח בְּשֶׁמֶן שֶׁאִם יַעֲשֶׂה כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה בְּחל שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא לִידֵי סְחִיטָה. וְכֵיצַד מַצִּיל מִמֶּנָּה. מֵבִיא כְּלִי וּמַנִּיחַ תַּחְתֶּיהָ. וְלֹא יָבִיא כְּלִי אַחֵר וְיִקְלֹט כְּלִי אַחֵר וִיצָרֵף גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יָבִיא כְּלִי דֶּרֶךְ רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. נִזְדַּמְּנוּ לוֹ אוֹרְחִים מֵבִיא כְּלִי אַחֵר וְקוֹלֵט כְּלִי אַחֵר וּמְצָרְפוֹ לָרִאשׁוֹן. וְלֹא יִקְלֹט וְאַחַר כָּךְ יַזְמִין אֶלָּא יַזְמִין וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִקְלֹט. וְאִם הֶעֱרִים בְּדָבָר זֶה מֻתָּר:
[A person who has] mud on his garments may rub the inner [surface of the garment so that the mud falls],74 but not the outer surface. [This is] a decree, [enacted] lest one launder it. One may, however, scrape it75 with one's nails,76 without concern that one might whiten it.77
It is forbidden to rub clean a scarf, since this launders it.78 One may, however, rub a cloak, because one's intent is merely to soften it.79
טִיט שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי בִּגְדוֹ מְכַסְכְּסוֹ מִבִּפְנִים וְאֵינוֹ מְכַסְכְּסוֹ מִבַּחוּץ גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יְכַבֵּס. וּמֻתָּר לְגָרְדוֹ בְּצִפֹּרֶן וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא יְלַבְּנוֹ. הַמְכַסְכֵּס אֶת הַסּוּדָר אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְלַבְּנוֹ אֲבָל הֶחָלוּק מֻתָּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין כַּוָּנָתוֹ אֶלָּא לְרַכְּכוֹ:
It is permitted to use water to rub clean a shoe or a sandal that has become soiled with mud or excrement. It is, however, forbidden to wash them.80 We may not scrape new sandals or shoes,81 but we may apply oil to them.82 [Similarly,] we may clean old [sandals and shoes].
A pillow or a blanket [soiled] with mud or excrement may be cleaned with a rag.83 If it is made of leather, one may pour water over it until the stain is removed.84
מִנְעָל אוֹ סַנְדָּל שֶׁנִּתְלַכְלֵךְ בְּטִיט וּבְצוֹאָה מֻתָּר לְשַׁכְשְׁכוֹ בְּמַיִם אֲבָל לְכַבְּסוֹ אָסוּר. וְאֵין מְגָרְדִּין לֹא מִנְעָלִים וְלֹא סַנְדָּלִים חֲדָשִׁים אֲבָל סָכִין (אוֹתָם) וּמְקַנְּחִין אֶת הַיְשָׁנִים. כַּר אוֹ כֶּסֶת שֶׁהָיָה עֲלֵיהֶן צוֹאָה אוֹ טִנּוּף מְקַנְּחוֹ בִּסְמַרְטוּט. וְאִם הָיְתָה עַל שֶׁל עוֹר נוֹתְנִין עָלֶיהָ מַיִם עַד שֶׁתִּכְלֶה:
A person whose hands have become soiled with mud may clean them with a horse's tail, a cow's tail, or a firm cloth used to hold thorns.85 [One may] not, [however, use a] cloth that is used to clean one's hands. [These restrictions were instituted] so that one will not follow one's weekday practice and come to launder the cloth.86
מִי שֶׁנִּתְלַכְלְכָה יָדוֹ בְּטִיט מְקַנְּחָהּ בִּזְנַב הַסּוּס וּבִזְנַב הַפָּרָה וּבְמַפָּה הַקָּשָׁה הָעֲשׂוּיָה לֶאֱחֹז בָּהּ הַקּוֹצִים. אֲבָל לֹא בְּמַפָּה שֶׁמְּקַנְּחִין בָּהּ אֶת הַיָּדַיִם שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה בְּחל וְיָבוֹא לְכַבֵּס אֶת הַמַּפָּה:
A person who washes himself in water may dry himself with a towel and carry it by hand; we do not suspect that he might wring [water from it].87
Similarly, a person whose clothes become soaked with water88 may continue walking in them; we do not suspect that he might wring [water from them].89 [When he removes them,] he may not, however, hang them out to dry even within his home, lest an observer suppose that he laundered his garment on the Sabbath and hung it out to dry.90 Whenever the Sages instituted a prohibition because of the impression it might create,91 the act is forbidden even in one's private chambers.92
מִי שֶׁרָחַץ בְּמַיִם מִסְתַּפֵּג בַּאֲלֻנְטִיתוֹ וּמְבִיאָהּ בְּיָדוֹ וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין שֶׁמָּא יִסְחֹט. וְכֵן מִי שֶׁנָּשְׁרוּ כֵּלָיו בְּמַיִם מְהַלֵּךְ בָּהֶן וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין שֶׁמָּא יִסְחֹט. וְאָסוּר לוֹ לְשָׁטְחָן וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יֹאמַר הָרוֹאֶה הֲרֵי זֶה כִּבֵּס כְּסוּתוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת וּשְׁטָחָהּ לְיַבְּשָׁהּ. וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁאָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן אֲפִלּוּ בְּחַדְרֵי חֲדָרִים אָסוּר:
When two mikvaot are located one on top of the other, one may remove the plug between them and connect them. Afterwards, one may return the plug to its place. There is no concern that one might squeeze out water [in the process of doing so], since one's intent is that the water should flow out.93
One may plug a drain with clothes or with any article that can be carried so that water will not inundate food and utensils.94 We may not, however, plug a drain so that water will descend into a cistern.95 The plug is resting in water and the possibility exists that one may squeeze [water from the plug] when one presses it into place.96
שְׁתֵּי מְטַהְרוֹת זוֹ עַל גַּב זוֹ נוֹטֵל אֶת הַפְּקָק מִבֵּינְתַיִם וּמְשִׁיקָן וּמַחֲזִיר אֶת הַפְּקָק לִמְקוֹמוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָּא לִידֵי סְחִיטָה שֶׁהֲרֵי דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁיֵּצְאוּ הַמַּיִם. וּפוֹקְקִין אֶת הַבִּיב בְּסוּדָרִין וּבְכָל דָּבָר הַמִּטַּלְטֵל כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָצוּפוּ הַמַּיִם עַל הָאֳכָלִים וְעַל הַכֵּלִים. אֲבָל אֵין פּוֹקְקִין אֶת הַבִּיב כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵּרְדוּ הַמַּיִם לַבּוֹר שֶׁמָּא יִסְחֹט בְּעֵת שֶׁדּוֹחֵק שֶׁהֲרֵי הַפְּקָק שָׁרוּי בְּמַיִם:
It is forbidden to fix the sleeves of garments, adjusting them to form layers of cuffs97 as is one's ordinary practice during the week after washing clothes.98
Similarly, we may not fold clothes on the Sabbath in the same way as we fold clothes during the week after laundering them. If one does not possess a change of clothes, one may fold a garment,99 stretch it out, and wear it so that one will [be dressed] attractively on the Sabbath.100 The above [restrictions] apply only to a new white garment that may become wrinkled and soiled immediately.101
Only one person may fold [a garment]; folding it by two people [together] is forbidden.102
אָסוּר לְתַקֵּן בֵּית יָד שֶׁל בְּגָדִים וּלְשַׁבְּרָם שְׁבָרִים שְׁבָרִים כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמְּתַקְּנִין בְּחל הַבְּגָדִים כְּשֶׁמְּכַבְּסִין אוֹתָן. וְכֵן אֵין מְקַפְּלִים הַבְּגָדִים בְּשַׁבָּת כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁעוֹשִׂין בְּחל בַּבְּגָדִים כְּשֶׁיְּכַבְּסוּ אוֹתָן. וְאִם לֹא הָיָה לוֹ כְּלִי אַחֵר לְהַחֲלִיפוֹ מֻתָּר לְקַפְּלוֹ וּלְפָשְׁטוֹ וּלְהִתְכַּסּוֹת בּוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּתְנָאֶה בּוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בֶּגֶד חָדָשׁ לָבָן שֶׁהֲרֵי הוּא מִתְמַעֵךְ וּמִתְלַכְלֵךְ מִיָּד. וּכְשֶׁיְּקַפֵּל לֹא יְקַפֵּל אֶלָּא אִישׁ אֶחָד אֲבָל לְקַפֵּל בִּשְׁנַיִם אָסוּר:
Dyeing is one of the categories of [forbidden] labor.103Accordingly, it is forbidden for a woman to apply rouge to her face,104 because this resembles dyeing.
Sewing is one of the categories of [forbidden] labor.105Accordingly, it is forbidden to fill a new pillow or blanket with unprocessed fabric, lest one sew it closed.106 On the Sabbath one may, however, return fabric that has fallen out from a pillow or blanket107.
הַצּוֹבֵעַ מֵאֲבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת לְפִיכָךְ אָסוּר לְאִשָּׁה לְהַעֲבִיר סְרָק עַל פָּנֶיהָ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כְּצוֹבַעַת. וְהַתּוֹפֵר מֵאֲבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת לְפִיכָךְ אָסוּר לְמַלְּאוֹת הַכַּר וְהַכֶּסֶת הַחֲדָשִׁים בְּמוֹכִין גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִתְפֹּר. אֲבָל מוֹכִין שֶׁנָּשְׁרוּ מִן הַכַּר אוֹ מִן הַכֶּסֶת מַחְזִירִין אוֹתָן בְּשַׁבָּת:
Tearing is one of the categories of [forbidden] labor.108Accordingly, a person whose garments catch onto thorns should separate them carefully109 and patiently, so that they do not tear. If they tear, he is not liable, for this is not his intent.110
It is permitted to wear new clothes; if they tear, it is of no consequence. We may crack open a nut in a piece of cloth without concern that [the cloth] might tear.
הַקּוֹרֵעַ מֵאֲבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת. לְפִיכָךְ מִי שֶׁנִּסְתַּבְּכוּ בְּגָדָיו בְּקוֹצִים מַפְרִישָׁן בְּצִנְעָה וּמִתְמַהְמֵהַּ כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִקְרַע. וְאִם נִקְרְעוּ אֵינוֹ חַיָּב כְּלוּם שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא נִתְכַּוִּן. וּמֻתָּר לִלְבּשׁ בְּגָדִים חֲדָשִׁים וְאִם נִקְרְעוּ נִקְרְעוּ. פּוֹצְעִין אֶת הָאֱגוֹז בְּמַטְלִית וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין שֶׁמָּא תִּקָּרַע:
A person who attaches [building materials to each other] is liable for performing a derivative [of the forbidden labor] of building.111 Therefore, all doors that are attached to the ground should not be removed, nor should they be returned to their place, lest one attach them.112
The doors of a cabinet, chest, or closet, or the doors of other utensils may be removed, but they may not be returned to their place.113 If their bottom hinge slips [partially out of place], it may be pushed back into place.114 In the Temple, it may be returned to its place.115 If, however, the upper hinge slips [out of place], it is forbidden to return it. [This is] a decree [applying] in all places,116 [enacted] lest one attach it.117
הַתּוֹקֵעַ חַיָּב מִשּׁוּם בּוֹנֶה. לְפִיכָךְ כָּל הַדְּלָתוֹת הַמְחֻבָּרוֹת לַקַּרְקַע לֹא נוֹטְלִין אוֹתָן וְלֹא מַחְזִירִין גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִתְקַע. אֲבָל דֶּלֶת שִׁדָּה תֵּבָה וּמִגְדָּל וּשְׁאָר דַּלְתוֹת הַכֵּלִים נוֹטְלִין וְלֹא מַחְזִירִין. וְאִם נִשְׁמַט צִיר הַתַּחְתּוֹן שֶׁלָּהֶן דּוֹחֲקִין אוֹתוֹ לִמְקוֹמוֹ. וּבַמִּקְדָּשׁ מַחְזִירִין אוֹתוֹ. אֲבָל צִיר הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁנִּשְׁמַט אָסוּר לְהַחֲזִירוֹ בְּכָל מָקוֹם גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִתְקַע:
One may not braid one's hair, or set one's hair around one's forehead,118 for this would appear to resemble building.
A candelabrum made up of separate pieces may not be reassembled on the Sabbath, nor may a chair or a table made up of pieces be reconstructed,119 for this resembles building.120 If, however, one does reassemble these objects, one is not liable,121 since [the forbidden labors] of building and demolishing do not apply regarding utensils.122 If [the parts of such a utensil] remain loosely put together, one may [complete] its assembly.123
We may not adjust the vertebra in a child's backbone [so that they are aligned] one above the other,124 since this resembles building.
אֵין גּוֹדְלִין אֶת שְׂעַר הָרֹאשׁ וְאֵין פּוֹקְסִין אוֹתוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּבוֹנֶה. וְאֵין מַחְזִירִין מְנוֹרָה שֶׁל חֻלְיוֹת וְלֹא כִּסֵּא הַמְפֻצָּל וְלֹא שֻׁלְחָן הַמְפֻצָּל וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּבוֹנֶה. וְאִם הֶחֱזִיר פָּטוּר שֶׁאֵין בִּנְיָן בְּכֵלִים וְאֵין סְתִירָה בְּכֵלִים. וְאִם הָיָה רָפוּי מֻתָּר לְהַחֲזִירוֹ. וְאֵין מְתַקְּנִין חֻלְיוֹת שֶׁל שִׁדְרָה שֶׁל קָטָן זוֹ בְּצַד זוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה כְּבוֹנֶה:
A person who erects a permanent tent is liable for performing a derivative [of the forbidden labor] of building.125 Accordingly, at the outset, it is forbidden to erect or demolish a temporary126 tent, lest one erect or demolish a permanent tent. If, however, one erects or demolishes a temporary tent, he is not liable.
One may add to a temporary tent on the Sabbath. What is implied? If a cloth was spread over pillars or over walls and was rolled up before the Sabbath, [the following rule applies]: If there was a portion the size of a handbreadth extended before the Sabbath,127 one may extend it until its full width on the Sabbath, causing it to become a large tent. The same applies in other similar situations.
הָעוֹשֶׂה אֹהֶל קָבוּעַ חַיָּב מִשּׁוּם בּוֹנֶה. לְפִיכָךְ אֵין עוֹשִׂין אֹהֶל עֲרַאי לְכַתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא סוֹתְרִין אֹהֶל עֲרַאי גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יַעֲשֶׂה אוֹ יִסְתֹּר אֹהֶל קָבוּעַ. וְאִם עָשָׂה אוֹ סָתַר אֹהֶל עֲרַאי פָּטוּר. וּמֻתָּר לְהוֹסִיף עַל אֹהֶל עֲרַאי בְּשַׁבָּת. כֵּיצַד. טַלִּית שֶׁהָיְתָה פְּרוּסָה עַל הָעַמּוּדִים אוֹ עַל הַכְּתָלִים וְהָיְתָה כְּרוּכָה קֹדֶם הַשַּׁבָּת אִם נִשְׁאָר מִמֶּנָּה גַּג טֶפַח מָתוּחַ הֲרֵי זֶה מוֹתֵחַ אֶת כֻּלָּהּ בְּשַׁבָּת עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה אֹהֶל גָּדוֹל. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
One may not hang a canopy over a bed, because a temporary tent is created beneath it. It is, by contrast, permissible to set down a bed, a chair, and a table128 even though a tent is created below them,129 since this is not the way either a permanent or temporary tent is fashioned.130
אֵין תּוֹלִין אֶת הַכִּלָּה שֶׁהֲרֵי נַעֲשֵׂית תַּחְתֶּיהָ אֹהֶל עֲרַאי. וּמֻתָּר לְהַנִּיחַ מִטָּה וְכִסֵּא וּטְרַסְקָל וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּעָשֶׂה תַּחְתֵּיהֶן אֹהֶל שֶׁאֵין זֶה דֶּרֶךְ עֲשִׂיַּת אֹהֶל לֹא קֶבַע וְלֹא עֲרַאי:
Any tent with a slanted roof whose roof is not a handbreadth wide,131 nor is the span three handbreadths below its roof a handbreadth wide,132 is considered to be a temporary tent. A person who erects it for the first time on the Sabbath is not liable.133
A cloth that is hanging134 doubled over on Friday135 with cords from which its ends are suspended may be spread out and rolled up136 [on the Sabbath]. The same [rules] apply to a curtain.137
כָּל אֹהֶל מְשֻׁפָּע שֶׁאֵין בְּגַגּוֹ טֶפַח וְלֹא בְּפָחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה סָמוּךְ לְגַגּוֹ רֹחַב טֶפַח הֲרֵי זֶה אֹהֶל עֲרַאי וְהָעוֹשֶׂה אוֹתוֹ לְכַתְּחִלָּה בְּשַׁבָּת פָּטוּר. טַלִּית כְּפוּלָה שֶׁהָיוּ עָלֶיהָ חוּטִין שֶׁהִיא תְּלוּיָה בָּהֶן מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת מֻתָּר לִנְטוֹתָהּ וּמֻתָּר לְפָרְקָהּ וְכֵן הַפָּרֹכֶת:
[The following rules apply to a bed over which is hung] a bridal canopy whose roof is not a handbreadth wide, nor is the span three handbreadths below its roof a handbreadth wide:138 Since it was prepared to serve this purpose [before the commencement of the Sabbath], it may be spread out and rolled up [on the Sabbath].139 [This leniency is granted,] provided it does not hang more than a handbreadth above the bed.140
A curtain141 used to close a window142 may be employed for that purpose even though it was not attached [to the window] or hanging [from it, because] it was prepared to be used for this intent.
כִּלַּת חֲתָנִים שֶׁאֵין בְּגַגָּהּ טֶפַח וְאֵין בְּפָחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה סָמוּךְ לְגַגָּהּ רֹחַב טֶפַח. הוֹאִיל שֶׁהִיא מְתֻקֶּנֶת לְכָךְ מֻתָּר לִנְטוֹתָהּ וּמֻתָּר לְפָרְקָהּ וְהוּא שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא מְשֻׁלְשֶׁלֶת מֵעַל הַמִּטָּה טֶפַח. פְּקַק הַחַלּוֹן בִּזְמַן שֶׁהוּא מְתֻקָּן לְכָךְ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ קָשׁוּר וְאֵינוֹ תָּלוּי מֻתָּר לִפְקֹק בּוֹ הַחַלּוֹן:
It is permitted to wear a hat with a brim that provides shade for the person wearing143 it.144 If, however, one extends the clothes one is wearing above one's head or in front of one's face like a tent and: a) [the clothes] are tightly fitted around one's head, and b) the brim that one extends is very firm like a roof,145 this is forbidden, because one is making a temporary tent.
כּוֹבַע שֶׁעוֹשִׂין עַל הָרֹאשׁ וְיֵשׁ לוֹ שָׂפָה מַקֶּפֶת שֶׁהִיא עוֹשָׂה צֵל כְּמוֹ אֹהֶל עַל לְבוּשׁוֹ מֻתָּר לְלָבְשׁוֹ. וְאִם הוֹצִיא מִן הַבֶּגֶד סָבִיב לְרֹאשׁוֹ אוֹ כְּנֶגֶד פָּנָיו כְּמוֹ אֹהֶל וְהָיָה מְהֻדָּק עַל רֹאשׁוֹ וְהָיְתָה הַשָּׂפָה שֶׁהוֹצִיאָהּ קָשָׁה בְּיוֹתֵר כְּמוֹ גַּג אָסוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה אֹהֶל עֲרַאי:
A person who hangs a curtain or the like should take care not to create a tent while he is doing so.146 Therefore, a large curtain should be hung by two individuals and is forbidden to be hung by a single person.
[Moreover,] a canopy with a roof147 may not be extended even if ten people help in doing so. For it is impossible that it will not be lifted up slightly above the ground [in the process] and thus form a temporary tent.
הַנּוֹטֶה פָּרֹכֶת וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ צָרִיךְ לְהִזָּהֵר שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה אֹהֶל בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁנּוֹטֶה לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיְתָה פָּרֹכֶת גְּדוֹלָה תּוֹלִין אוֹתָהּ שְׁנַיִם אֲבָל אֶחָד אָסוּר. וְאִם הָיְתָה כִּלָּה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ גַּג אֵין מוֹתְחִין אוֹתָהּ וַאֲפִלּוּ עֲשָׂרָה שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁלֹּא תִּגְבַּהּ מְעַט מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ וְתֵעָשֶׂה אֹהֶל עֲרַאי:
[A person] who covers a jug with a cloth should not cover it entirely, for this is considered to be making148 a tent.149 Instead, he should cover [merely] a portion of its opening.
A person who filters using an Egyptian basket150 should not lift the bottom of the basket above the utensil on the Sabbath so that he will not be creating a temporary tent.151
בֶּגֶד שֶׁמְּכַסֶּה בּוֹ פִּי הֶחָבִית לֹא יְכַסֶּה בּוֹ אֶת כֻּלָּהּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה אֹהֶל אֲבָל מְכַסֶּה הוּא מִקְצָת פִּיהָ. הַמְסַנֵּן בִּכְפִיפָה מִצְרִית לֹא יַגְבִּיהַּ קַרְקָעִית הַכְּפִיפָה מִן הַכְּלִי טֶפַח כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה אֹהֶל עֲרַאי בְּשַׁבָּת:
See Chapter 3, Halachah 18, and Chapter 5, Halachah 19, where this subject is discussed at length. As the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 254:5) states, if one places the loaf of bread into the oven in time for it to form a crust, there is no prohibition against removing it on the Sabbath. When, however, there was not enough time for a crust to form, one must follow the instructions mentioned by the Rambam.
Note the parallel in Chapter 23, Halachah 24.
I.e., according to the Torah, there is no prohibition against bathing.
Even one without attendants (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 326:1).
As Shabbat 40a relates, a series of Rabbinic decrees were passed regarding bathhouses. When the Sages saw that the bath attendants would heat up water on the Sabbath, they forbade bathing, but allowed the people to enter a bathhouse to use as a steam bath. Afterwards, they saw that because of this leniency their original prohibition was not being observed, and they forbade entering a bathhouse altogether.
The Rambam permits bathing in cold water, and this ruling is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 326:1). Nevertheless, most of the later Ashkenazic halachic authorities (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 326:6; Mishnah Berurah 326:21) state that it is customary not to bathe on the Sabbath at all, even in cold water. As is mentioned in Chapter 23, Halachah 8, an exception to the above rules is made regarding immersion in the mikveh.
I.e., even when one does not enter a bath.
Or other select portions of the body. A woman may wash her vaginal area in preparation for a hefsek taharah.
Similarly, leniency is granted regarding open bodies of water that have been heated by the sun, as stated in Halachah 9.
Note Shulchan Aruch HaRav 326:2 and the Mishnah Berurah 326:11, which favor opinions that do not accept this restriction.
See the following halachah and notes, which deal with the question whether this restriction applies after rinsing, not only one's entire body, but even a single limb.
The Maggid Mishneh emphasizes that in this instance, it is not heating the water in itself that is forbidden, since one is heating it to a minimal temperature. (See the following halachah.) Rather, the problem stems from the resemblance to bathing in warm water.
I.e., a duct or pipe containing cold water passes through a body of hot water and thus becomes warm. Even if one does not take the water from the duct itself, but has the duct flow into a pool, the water is forbidden (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:3). Shabbat 3:3 relates that the inhabitants of Tiberias actually had such a heating system constructed, but the Sages forbade its use.
The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) mentions that even if the pipe was brought into the hot water on Friday, the water may not be used on the Sabbath.
The Rambam's intent is that the water or the oil may be heated to the point that it becomes hot enough to burn a infant's belly.
This decision is questioned by the Rabbis. Rashi and the Rambam interpret the Talmudic passage (Shabbat 40b) that serves as the source for this halachah as meaning that one may not allow the temperature of the liquid to reach the point where it could burn an infant's belly. The Rashba, Tosafot and others, however, follow a more stringent ruling and forbid placing a liquid in a place where the potential exists for it to become hot enough to burn a infant's belly, even if one removes it before that time. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 318:14) accepts the latter view.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 326:5) mentions opinions that differ and maintain that the restriction mentioned in the previous halachah applies not only after rinsing one's entire body, but after washing a single limb. For example, a person who washes his hands should not warm them by a fire. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 326:4 counsels following this stringency.
This is the halachic definition of the term יד סולדת בו. In contemporary measure, this is defined as 42 to 45 degrees centigrade by contemporary authorities.
With this statement, the Rambam emphasizes that the tub is very hot and contains a large amount of water. Therefore, even though it is a כלי שני - i.e., not a vessel that was itself heated on a fire, but a vessel into which hot water was poured - there are still restrictions, as the Rambam explains. Implied is that even though we generally follow the rule that the heat of a כלי שני is not sufficient to cook something placed within, a tub in a bathhouse is an exception.
The above represents the interpretation of the Maggid Mishneh. In the Kessef Mishneh, by contrast, Rav Yosef Karo explains that the tub we are speaking about is a כלי ראשון, a vessel in which water was heated. Were it to be a כלי שני, there would be no restrictions. His ruling in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 318:11), appears to reflect this same view. The Ramah differs and clarifies in his gloss that the tub here is a כלי שני, adopting the explanation of the Maggid Mishneh.
The Ramah 318:12 states that if the amount of cold water the person adds at one time is so great that the it will not become hot, there is no prohibition against adding it, even to a כלי ראשון.
Shabbat 40b mentions that oil that is placed in a כלי שני does not cook. The Kessef Mishneh thus uses this as a support for his thesis that the Rambam is speaking about a tub that is a כלי ראשון. Others explain that, as stated above, even though in most instances we follow the rule that the heat of a כלי שני is not sufficient to cook something placed within, a tub in a bathhouse is an exception.
See also Hilchot Ma'aser 3:15, where it appears that the Rambam maintains that if a כלי שני is hot enough to burn a person's hand, oil that is placed inside will be cooked. The Radbaz, however, explains that the laws applying to cooking on the Sabbath are different from those applying to cooking regarding ma'aser.
Even according to the opinions that the Rambam is referring to a כלי ראשון, this is permitted. Although there are restrictions against pouring water from a כלי ראשון onto spices and the like, these restrictions do not apply when water is poured into other water. The rationale is that the waters mix and there is no time when the heat of the water from the כלי ראשון will be concentrated in a single space (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 318:20; Mishnah Berurah 318:78).
According to Rav Yosef Karo (in the Kessef Mishneh and in the Shulchan Aruch 318:12), this refers to a heating urn that was emptied entirely of hot water. One might think that pouring cold water in it would be forbidden, since the possibility exists that by doing so one will refine the metal of the urn. (See Chapter 12, Halachah 2, and notes.) Nevertheless, since this is not one's intent (אינו מתכוין), nor is it absolutely certain that this will take place (i.e., it is not a פסיק רישא), this is permitted (Chapter 1, Halachah 6).
The Maggid Mishneh and the Ramah accept this law, but they explain that it is also possible to interpret the Rambam's words as referring to an urn that was partially emptied of the water that was cooked in it, and then cold water was added. Even though the urn is a כלי ראשון, as long as so much cold water is poured in that it cannot become hot enough to burn an infant's belly, there is no prohibition involved.
I.e., even hot water that is in a כלי ראשון.
Which is in a כלי שני.
The Mishnah Berurah 318:82 emphasizes that if there is a small quantity of cold water, the restriction against using water from a כלי ראשון applies in both instances. One may not pour a small amount of cold water into a large amount of hot water, nor may one pour a large amount of hot water into a small amount of cold water. This ruling is not, however, accepted by all authorities. As mentioned above, according to the Ramah, one may pour hot water into a large amount of cold water, and a large amount of cold water into hot water, even if the hot water is in a כלי ראשון.
This law applies to most other substances, for most substances will cook in a כלי ראשון even after it is removed from a fire.
There is a difference of opinion concerning this matter among the Rabbis. The Tur (Orach Chayim 318) and Tosafot (Shabbat 40b) differ and maintain that salt requires only a minimal amount of cooking and should not even be placed in a כלי שני. The later authorities emphasize that this depends on the type of salt used. In many communities, it is common to follow the more stringent ruling.
It must be emphasized that our Sages mention that there are certain substances that do not require much cooking and can be cooked even in a כלי שני. For that reason, some authorities maintain that we should be stringent and not place any uncooked articles in a כלי שני, for we are unsure of which substances are included in the category of foods that do not require much cooking. See Ramah, Orach Chayim 318:5.
See Chapter 21, Halachah 22.
From the Rambam's placement of this halachah in this chapter, it would appear that he sees this as falling into the category of prohibitions instituted as a safeguard against cooking on the Sabbath, and not as one of the prohibitions instituted because it is forbidden to prepare remedies on the Sabbath.
Since soaking chiltit in cold water is forbidden only because of a Rabbinic prohibition, this prohibition is overridden because of the possibility of the person's becoming ill.
This law touches on the principle, אין בישול אחר בישול, "One is not liable for cooking something that is already cooked." Although this principle is accepted by all authorities, the scope of its application varies. To focus on the approach of the Rambam and to compare it to the perspective of other authorities, it is worthy to focus on each point in particular:
When food has been cooked before the Sabbath - According to the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 318:4), this refers only to food that has been thoroughly cooked.
or soaked in hot water before the Sabbath - In contrast to the Rambam's decision, the Mishnah Berurah 318:31 rules that food that was soaked in hot water before the Sabbath may be placed in hot water in a כלי שני, but should not be placed in hot water in a כלי ראשון.
one is permitted to soak it in hot water - This refers to water in a כלי ראשון that was removed from its cooking surface. It is forbidden to place any food in a pot on a cooking surface after the Sabbath has commenced (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 318:9; Mishnah Berurah 318:33).
on the Sabbath even though it is presently cold. - The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) states that this leniency applies only to cooked food that is dry. If the food is liquid, placing it in a כלי ראשון that is hot is considered to be cooking. From the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 22:2), it would appear that he also accepts this limitation. The Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 318), however, maintains that the Rambam does not hold one liable, even when one reheats foods that are not dry.
From the Rambam's wording, it is unclear if this refers to water that was in a כלי ראשון or in a כלי שני. From his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 3:4), it would appear that he maintains that it is permitted to pour water from a כלי ראשון directly on foods.
According to the Ashkenazic authorities, we are permitted to pour hot water on uncooked foods only from a כלי שני (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 318:11; Mishnah Berurah 318:35). Hot water from a כלי ראשון will cook the surface of the food onto which it is poured.
This clause comes to eliminate foods like aged salted fish or sole, whose preparation is completed by washing them with hot water. As the Rambam writes in Chapter 9, Halachah 2, one is liable for violating the forbidden labor of cooking merely by rinsing these foods with hot water.
The prohibition applies only to soaking the food in hot water. One may soak it in cold water (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 318:11; Mishnah Berurah 318:37).
See Chapter 9, Halachah 3. This prohibition was instituted lest one err and think that just as it is permitted to cook using articles heated by the sun, it is permitted to cook using articles heated by fire.
I.e., the leniency of placing water in the sun will not cause one to think that it is permitted to place food on a fire.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 22:4), the Rambam emphasizes that this law is mentioned because one might think that placing the water in the sun is forbidden, lest one place food in hot ashes.
On this basis, many authorities allow the use of water that has been heated by solar energy units on the Sabbath. Even the more stringent opinions, which object to such use, have no difficulty with the concept of using water heated by the sun. They base their objections on other rationales, among them:
That water heated by the solar energy units is heated by an object heated by the sun and not by the sun itself.
The water in the urn of the solar energy unit is very hot. When cold water enters that unit, it will be heated by the water and produce a situation resembling that of the tub mentioned in Halachah 5.
The bracketed additions are taken from Rashi's commentary (Shabbat 146b).
Rashi (loc. cit.) explains that were the food left in the sun, it might spoil. By placing it in the cistern, one preserves it.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit., based on Shabbat 146b), the Rambam emphasizes that this law is mentioned because one might think that placing the food in the cistern is forbidden lest one smooth out the cistern's floor.
Enough for one meal (Ba'er Heteiv 321:4).
Significantly, Rashi (Shabbat 108b) explains that the rationale for all the laws in this halachah is that salting or pickling foods is comparable to processing leather. This rationale is mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 321:2). The Rambam, however, maintains that the forbidden labor of processing does not apply with regard to food (Chapter 11, Halachah 5).
In the Kessef Mishneh and in the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), Rav Yosef Karo states that it is forbidden to make even a small amount of such a mixture.
In the Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Karo explains that usually fish-brine is preserved. Hence, it would appear that one is pickling food.
Included in the latter category are any vegetables that salt softens or makes less bitter. This includes onions, cucumbers, and most vegetables used for salads (Magen Avraham 321:7).
The Rambam's intent is not that pickling is forbidden as a derivative of cooking, but that there is a Rabbinic prohibition against doing so (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 321:3; Mishnah Berurah 321:16). Note, however, Karti Ufalti 105:2, which maintains that the Rambam considers that there is a Torah prohibition involved.
Similarly, a mixture of salt, vinegar, and oil (or other substances used for salad dressings) may be placed on these vegetables, because it no longer appears that one is salting the vegetables to pickle them (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 321:4; Mishnah Berurah 321:14).
Note the Mishnah Berurah 321:69, which permits making this mixture only when one does not undertake much effort in doing so.
Hence, this mixture, like any other remedy, may not be drunk on the Sabbath even if it was prepared before the Sabbath.
The Rambam appears to be saying that one may stir the mixture. The Mishnah Berurah 321:58, however, quotes this law as meaning that one may add water or wine to the mixture. Although the Rambam would probably accept that ruling as well, based on his conception of the Rabbinic prohibitions against kneading (see Chapter 21, Halachot 33-34 and notes), this is not likely his intent here.
The Hebrew word כלי can be rendered as either "utensil" or "container." On this basis, the Kessef Mishneh mentions the interpretation of Terumat HaDeshen (Responsum 53), which explains that one may shake a container to blend the mixture, but one may not stir it by hand. He does not, however, accept this as reflecting the Rambam's intent.
I.e., whip it forcefully by hand to produce a smooth, evenly flowing mixture.
A leafy vegetable that is used as a spice or dip when mixed with the abovementioned substances.
As explained in Chapter 9, Halachot 8-9.
A fragrant spice, noted for its cleansing powers.
This follows the principle of פסיק רישא stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 6 - i.e., since one's act will surely result in the performance of a prohibited act, it is considered as if this is one's intent. Although a Rabbinic prohibition is involved here, the same principle still holds.
This decision is based on the principle of אינו מתכוין, that an act that results in the performance of a forbidden labor is permitted if it is not a certainty that the forbidden labor will indeed come about. Indeed, the Rambam uses this law to exemplify this principle in Chapter 1, Halachah 5.
This is the version in the standard published texts of the Mishneh Torah. The Maggid Mishneh notes that there is another version of the text which reverses the order in this clause, stating, "If the majority was a substance that will not necessarily remove hair, it is permitted." There is a difference in the rulings resulting from these two versions of the text when the amount of both substances is equal. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 326:9) follows the version of the standard text.
Sefer HaKovetz questions why such a leniency is allowed, and explains that all prohibitions based on the principle of פסיק רישא are merely Rabbinic in origin. Accordingly, since the substances that undoubtedly remove hair are not in the majority, leniency is granted. (It must be noted that it is difficult to reconcile the statements of Sefer HaKovetz with the Rambam's own statements, Chapter 1, Halachah 6, that one is liable for performing such an act.)
I.e., as Shabbat 149b emphasizes, the difficulty is because a metal mirror can serve as a cutting article itself.
The Sages desired that their decrees be applied uniformly.
This includes a glass mirror, as is used today (Maggid Mishneh; Mishnah Berurah 302:63).
Rav Moshe Cohen of Lunil questions the Rambam's ruling, since one's intent is not to wring out the liquid, but to plug the flask. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 320:22 states that when one plugs the opening firmly, one will certainly squeeze water from it. Hence, this is considered a פסיק רישא. Furthermore, our Sages forbade plugging the opening loosely, lest one plug it firmly.
The Kessef Mishneh (in the gloss on Chapter 9, Halachah 11) uses this law to refute the Maggid Mishneh's thesis that, according to the Rambam, the prohibition against wringing out liquids applies only to water, since it is generally beverages other than water that are contained in a flask.
As evident from his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 21:3), the Rambam explains that if the sponge does not have a handle, it is a פסיק רישא that one will squeeze water from it when cleaning with it. If it has a handle, that is not a certainty. This interpretation is also reflected in Rashi's commentary, Shabbat 143a.
Although the Ra'avad accepts the law, he objects to this explanation, maintaining that whether or not the sponge has a handle, one will squeeze water out when cleaning with it. Why then is one allowed to use it? Once the handle is attached, it is no longer considered to be a piece of fabric, but rather a container that is made to hold water. By using it, one is not squeezing the water directly, but merely causing it to be squeezed.
Note Shulchan Aruch HaRav 320:21, which states that this decree applies only to a jug of water, but not to one containing other beverages. See, however, the Kessef Mishneh's statements cited in note 63.
I.e., unless the cloth was designated for this purpose, it is possible that if it gets wet, one will wring out the water so that one can use it for another purpose. If, however, one has set aside the cloth for this use, one will not be concerned with its getting wet.
Based on the ruling of Tosafot (Shabbat 143b), the Ramah (Orach Chayim 335:1) emphasizes that this law applies only when the cask breaks. If it has a slow leak, there are no restrictions. Since there is no possibility of the person's losing the entire contents of the cask at once, our Sages did not fear that he would panic and violate the Sabbath laws to save his property.
The Ramah also mentions the ruling of Terumat HaDeshen (Responsum 196) that these restrictions apply only when one desires to bring containers from one courtyard to another. There are, however, no restrictions on using different containers within one's own property. This leniency is accepted by the later Ashkenazic authorities.
According to the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 335:1), one may save enough for one's Sabbath needs and the needs of one's guests, even if it is necessary to use several containers. As Rabbi Akiva Eiger notes in his gloss, the Rambam's wording does not appear to fit this interpretation.
The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) states that this restriction applies even when a sponge has a handle. (See the previous halachah.) Since the person is distressed about the loss of his property, our Sages fear that he might violate the Sabbath laws in this instance.
I.e., there are two restrictions: that one may save only a limited amount of wine or oil, and that the manner in which one saves these liquids must differ from one's ordinary practice.
According to the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.), there is no restriction on the size of this container. Any container may be used, regardless of the amount it can hold. As mentioned, the Rambam's wording does not appear to fit this interpretation.
I.e., invite guests who he knows will not want to partake of the liquids. In this way, he will be able to save the liquids because of them, even though they will not partake of them. (See Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 3:17, where the Rambam mentions a similar instance where the Sages permitted one to act with guile.)
The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:3) states that it is forbidden to invite guests with this intent. If, however, one does so, it is permitted to use the wine. It is possible that this is the Rambam's intent. (The Shulchan Aruch's leniency is actually even more encompassing, and allows one to use the wine if one invites the guests after collecting it.) Based on the Maggid Mishneh, the Magen Avraham 335:2, however, states that according to the Rambam, one is permitted to act with guile in this manner.
(Kinat Eliyahu objects to this interpretation, noting the difference in the Rambam's wording in this halachah, "If one acted with guile in this matter, it is permitted," and his wording in Chapter 23, Halachah 3, "It is permitted to act with guile in this matter.")
Since the person rubs it from the inside, it is not obvious that his intent is to launder the garment (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 302:7).
Even from the outside.
Or with a knife (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 302:17; Mishnah Berurah 302:34).
The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) quotes the opinion of the Tur, which states that both rubbing the inside of a garment and scraping off mud are permitted only when the mud is moist. When the mud has dried, these acts are forbidden, because it is as if one is grinding the mud.
The Ramban and the Ra'avad follow a different version of the text of Shabbat 140a, and therefore rule that it is also permitted to rub a scarf. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit:5) follows the Rambam's decision, explaining that when rubbing a scarf, one's intent is to make it glistening clean.
The Be'ur Halachah cites support for the Rambam's ruling from Mo'ed Katan 10b, which states that it is permitted to rub clean one's garments on Chol HaMo'ed (see Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 8:14). This indicates that such an act is forbidden on the Sabbath.
I.e., a cloak becomes stiff after being laundered, and before putting it on one generally rubs it (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.).
Note Chapter 9, Halachah 11, where the Rambam states that one is not liable for wringing out leather. Similarly, the fact that he mentions the prohibition against laundering leather in this chapter appears to indicate that he considers it to be merely a Rabbinic prohibition. This perspective is also quoted by Shulchan Aruch HaRav 302:19. The Be'ur Halachah 302, however, explains that one is liable for laundering leather.
The Rambam appears to allow one to scrape old shoes. The Ra'avad and the Maggid Mishneh object to this ruling, based on Shabbat 141a-b, which states that it is forbidden to scrape both new and old shoes.
The commentaries offer several resolutions of this difficulty. Some point to manuscript copies of the Mishneh Torah that omit the word "new" entirely (Radbaz, Vol. V, Responsum 1628). Others explain that the Rambam mentions "new" shoes for specific reasons, but not to imply that scraping old shoes is permitted (Rabbenu Meir of Padua). Others find sources to substantiate the Rambam's ruling (Sefer HaKovetz).
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 302:8) forbids scraping both old and new shoes. Significantly, however, the prohibition is associated with the forbidden labor of removing hair. Note also the Magen Avraham 302:17 who emphasizes that the prohibition applies only when using a knife. Using dull metal is permitted.
See Chapter 23, Halachah 10, which appears to contradict this ruling. Similarly, the Ra'avad and others question the text here. Significantly, Rav Kapach mentions that the Yemenite manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah follow an alternate version of the text, which does not present a difficulty.
Care must be taken not to press the rag firmly, lest one squeeze out water from it (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.:9).
One may not, however, rub them under water to remove the stain (Maggid Mishneh). Washing a cloth in water would be considered as laundering, even according to Torah law (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 302:20).
The Mishnah Berurah 302:57 states that one may also use a rag that is of no importance.
I.e., the prohibition was not instituted because of the act of washing one's hands with the cloth, but because one might wash the cloth later.
The Magen Avraham 301:58 focuses on this law as an example of the relation of the principles of Rabbinic authority to the changes in the cultural conditions under which Jews lived. Originally, this leniency was granted, because in the Talmudic era washing every day was considered a necessity, and a person who washes himself must dry himself. In his own time, washing was not considered as great a necessity. Hence, some thought of ruling that using a towel would be prohibited. Nevertheless, since the Sages of the Talmud did not institute a prohibition in this regard, the later Rabbis left the status quo unchanged. The Magen Avraham, however, concludes that it is preferable to dry oneself with a towel that one would not normally wring out during the week.
I.e., from rain, or because he fell into a body of water.
He must, however, be careful not to shake the water from them.
We are not, however, obligated to remove clothes that were hanging on a clothesline before the Sabbath (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 301:45).
The Mishnah Berurah 301:165 cites authorities who maintain that this applies only with respect to a safeguard instituted because of the possibility that an observer might think a prohibition from the Torah was violated. When the question revolves around a Rabbinic prohibition, there is room for leniency.
For the Sages wanted to established a uniform standard, applicable at all times.
The Kessef Mishneh explains that since the person desires to connect the two mikvaot, he will not insert the plug firmly to the extent that he will squeeze water from it.
In this instance, the person's concern is to prevent the food and utensils from being inundated by the flow of water. Accordingly, his intent will be to plug the drain in a manner that will prevent a great flow. He, however, is not concerned that there will be a slight leak and will not necessarily plug the drain tightly (Kessef Mishneh).
Merkevet HaMishneh offers a different interpretation. The Rambam is referring to a plug for a hole in a cistern. The person sees that the drain pipes leading to the cistern are full and soon the water level will reach the hole. He therefore plugs the hole so that the water will not flow out and flood the courtyard. Although he plugs the hole tightly, since the water level has not yet reached this height, there is no possibility that he will squeeze out water in the process.
I.e., there is a drain-pipe that leads in two directions. By plugging one end, the water can be directed into a cistern.
Since in this instance, the person wants to direct the flow of the water and preserve all of it, he will plug the other end of the pipe tightly. When doing so, the possibility exists that he will squeeze water from the plug.
Our translation is based on Rashi's commentary, Beitzah 23a.
See Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 8:14, which states that this is forbidden on Chol HaMo'ed because it requires professional expertise.
This appears to refer to folding a garment with the intent of smoothing out wrinkles that already exist. Similarly, one may fold a garment after removing it, in order that it remain uncreased so it can be worn again on the Sabbath (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 302:8).
One may fold and refold a garment several times on the Sabbath (Shabbat 15:3). If, however, there is no need to wear a garment again on the Sabbath, one may not fold it so that it will remain uncreased for the following day. For this reason, it is forbidden to fold one's tallit on the Sabbath after the morning prayers (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 302:8; Mishnah Berurah 302:13).
Note Rashi (Shabbat 113a), who offers a different explanation of the Talmudic passage that serves as the source for the Rambam's ruling.
When two people fold a garment, the possibility exists that one will smooth out the creases by hand. This is forbidden (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 302:9).
Similarly, the application of other forms of makeup is forbidden (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 303:25 and commentaries).
Note Rashi (Shabbat 48a), who offers a different rationale for this restriction: that this resembles making a utensil.
The Mishnah Berurah 340:32 emphasizes that one may return them to the same pillow or blanket, but may not transfer them to another one on the Sabbath.
Our translation has parallels in the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, D'mai 6:6 and Kilayim 9:5. The Merkevet HaMishneh, however, renders this word as "modestly" - i.e., so others will not see him and think that he is tearing.
As mentioned several times, a person is not liable for performing a forbidden labor without intention. In this instance, there is an even greater reason for leniency, since the concept of intent is particularly important regarding this category of forbidden labor. As the Rambam mentions in Chapter 10, the forbidden labor of tearing consists of tearing for the sake of resewing.
See Chapter 10, Halachot 12-14.
The Maggid Mishneh questions the Rambam's statements here, noting that from the halachot cited above, it would appear that by returning the doors to their place one would be liable for performing the forbidden labor of building.
According to the Ramah (Orach Chayim 314:1), this law applies only to small cabinents and chests, those smaller than 40 seah, approximately .375 square meters in modern measure.
In a related matter, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 308:34-35 emphasizes that in contrast to the doors of a building, the doors of cabinets, chests, and the like are not considered muktzeh on the Sabbath. Since they were part of a utensil before they were removed, they are still considered to be utensils afterwards. In contrast, the doors of a building were not considered utensils before the commencement of the Sabbath. Hence, if they are removed on the Sabbath, it is forbidden to carry them.
If, however, it slips off entirely, it may not be returned outside the Temple (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 313:5).
Since the prohibitions in the category of sh'vut need not be observed in the Temple.
I.e., even in the Temple. This is an exception to the principle mentioned in the previous note, because, in this instance it is very likely that one will perform a forbidden labor (Tosafot, Eruvin 102b).
There is a greater concern that one will attach the upper hinge firmly, because if it becomes detached the door will fall. If, by contrast, the upper hinge remains attached but the lower hinge slips off, the door will still remain hanging.
Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 10:7). Rashi interprets this term to refer to "parting the hair." Note also the Mishnah Berurah 303:83, which discusses whether this restriction applies regarding only a woman's natural hair, or also regarding a wig.
See also Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 315:5), which - albeit in a different context - allows the use of folding chairs on the Sabbath. One may add a leaf to a table, but one may not construct a table by placing the table board on its legs.
Many other authorities differ and explain that the prohibition was instituted lest one firmly attach the parts to each other. Were one to do so, one would be liable for performing the forbidden labor of מכה בפטיש, completing a utensil (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 313:6).
It appears that, accordingly to the Rambam, even if a person were to attach the parts firmly to each other, he would not be liable. As mentioned, others differ.
The Rambam's perspective on this issue requires clarification: Beitzah 22a states, "There is no [concept of] building regarding utensils."
The Rambam explains that this refers only to putting together a utensil that is made up of several component parts. Fashioning a new utensil, by contrast, is surely considered building, as explained in Chapter 10, Halachah 13 and notes. As mentioned, others differ and maintain that a person who fashions a new utensil is liable for performing the forbidden labor of מכה בפטיש, completing a utensil.
According to the Rambam, the rationale for the leniency appears to be that since the parts hang loosely, one would not confuse assembling such a structure with erecting a building. According to the other authorities, the rationale is that since the parts of the utensil hang loosely, there is little likelihood that one will attach the parts firmly to each other.
This refers to adjusting the child's limbs by hand. As mentioned in Chapter 21, Halachah 31, one may tie clothes around the child to adjust his limbs. Furthermore, on the day of a child's birth, it is permitted to adjust his limbs (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 330:10; Mishnah Berurah 330:34). Even afterwards, many authorities allow the adjustment of other limbs, with the exception of the backbone.
In this context, the word "temporary" is defined as "not constructed to remain for a prolonged period" (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 315:1). It would appear that, according to the Rambam, even if a tent has a roof that is a handbreadth wide, its classification as permanent or temporary depends on the intent of the person who erects it. (See the Noda BiY'hudah, Vol. II, Orach Chayim, Responsum 30.)
Based on this restriction, the Noda BiY'hudah (loc. cit.) forbids opening an umbrella on the Sabbath. Similarly, because of the appearance that might be created, he forbids carrying an umbrella on the Sabbath even when: a) it was opened before the Sabbath, and b) the community possesses an eruv that makes it permitted to carry.
If, however, the overhang was not at all extended before the commencement of the Sabbath, it may not be extended on the Sabbath. Although it was suspended above the wall before the Sabbath, since it was completely rolled up, it may not be used.
Similarly, it is permitted to place a table-top on its legs (Maggid Mishneh). Note, however, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 315:3), which forbids placing a table-top on legs that appear as walls.
I.e., a space is covered by a surface supported by four legs.
Since one does not use the space below them (Maggid Mishneh).
Note the apparent contradiction between the Rambam's ruling here and his ruling in Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 4:15, and the resolution offered by the Lechem Mishneh there.
I.e., the walls of the tent slant downward, and it does not have a straight roof that is a handbreadth wide.
Based on the principle of l'vud, the space within three handbreadths is considered to be a single entity. Thus, were it to be a handbreadth wide, the tent would be considered as having a roof of significant size (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 315:15).
This follows the opinion of Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi and Rabbenu Chanan'el. Rashi and Rabbenu Asher, by contrast, maintain that since the tent does not have a roof that is a handbreadth wide, it can never be considered even a temporary tent, and there is no prohibition in constructing it. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 315:8) follows the Rambam's ruling.
I.e., there is a beam in the middle of a room on which a cloth is rolled that will be spread out to serve as a cover for a bed. Cords are attached to the cloth, and when they are pulled it is extended to form the canopy. Needless to say, such a canopy must meet the criteria mentioned in the first clause of this halachah regarding the width of its roof (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 315:16; Mishnah Berurah 315:37).
As implied by the first clause, had the cloth not been hanging before the commencement of the Sabbath, hanging it on the Sabbath itself would have been forbidden. Nevertheless, since it was hanging before the Sabbath and the cords that extend it are already in place, it is considered already to have been extended the length of a handbreadth. Therefore, extending it further is permitted, as mentioned in Halachah 27 (ibid.).
Since spreading out the cloth is not considered to be building a tent, closing it is not considered to be demolishing one (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 315:16; Mishnah Berurah 315:38). This and all the other leniencies associated with a temporary tent apply when the roof of the temporary tent is less than a handbreadth wide (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 315:17; Mishnah Berurah 315:38). This ruling is also reflected in the following halachah.
Note the Ramah (Orach Chayim 315:1), who states that one may hang a curtain on the Sabbath, even if one intends to leave it hanging permanently, provided there is no halachic significance to its being hung - e.g., to hang a curtain in front of a toilet so that one could pray in that same room.
Note also the Mishnah Berurah 315:38, which states that the wording of this halachah indicates that the cords from which a curtain hangs must be prepared before the commencement of the Sabbath, as the cords of the cloth mentioned immediately before. There are, however, other authorities who do not accept this view. (See also Halachah 32, which describes the manner in which a curtain may be hung.)
Thus, it meets the criteria of a temporary tent mentioned in the previous halachah.
This represents a greater leniency than the previous halachah. In that halachah, leniency was granted only because the ends of the canopy were hanging from the curtain rods and attached by strings. In this instance, the canopy was not hanging before the Sabbath. Nevertheless, since it was prepared to serve this purpose, it is permitted.
The Maggid Mishneh cites the interpretation of the Rashba, who explains that this refers to a canopy that hangs down a handbreadth below the bed. The part that hangs down is thus considered to be a wall - and the slanted portion of the canopy, a roof.
Based on this interpretation, he finds it necessary to differentiate between such a canopy and a sheet or blanket extended over a bed that is used at present. In the latter instance, even though the sheet or blanket extends more than a handbreadth on either side of the bed, it is not considered a tent, since it was not spread out with the purpose of enclosing space. The canopy, by contrast, was spread out for that purpose and hence is considered a tent in certain instances.
Although this interpretation is accepted by the later authorities (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 315:18; Mishnah Berurah 315:42), Rav Kapach notes that it does not fit the wording used by the Rambam, "provided it does not hang more than a handbreadth above the bed." He thus explains that if the canopy hangs more than a handbreadth above the bed, that open space is considered a wall, and the canopy, its roof.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 17:7). Others render this as "a shutter." It would, however, appear that the Rambam would not object to the use of a shutter for this purpose. Indeed, as indicated by Shabbat 24:5, it is permitted to use any utensil for this purpose. Compare also to Chapter 26, Halachah 10.
The rationale for this leniency is that this is considered equivalent to closing a window or a door which is permitted on the Sabbath (Shabbat 125b).
The same rules apply regarding an aperture in the roof (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 313:1; Mishnah Berurah 313:1).
In this instance, we have adopted the version of this halachah found in the Yemenite manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah. The version of the standard published texts would be rendered "on one's garments."
The Maggid Mishneh and similarly, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 301:40), interpret this as referring to a hat with a brim less than a handbreadth. According to their interpretation, putting on such a hat is forbidden even in one's home. The Noda BiY'hudah (Vol. II, Orach Chayim, Responsum 30), however, explains that there is no prohibition against putting on a hat, regardless of how wide its brim is.
Note the Radbaz (Vol. V, Responsum 1450), who explains that both of these stipulations are derived from the Hebrew word מהודק used in Shabbat 138b, the source for this halachah. מהודק means "firm," and in this context, the use of the word implies both "firmly attached" and that the brim is firm. When both these stipulations are fulfilled, the garment resembles a tent.
Note Rashi, however, who explains that the head-covering must be firmly attached to one's head. Otherwise, one may not wear it in the public domain, lest the wind blow it from one's head. Rashi's interpretation is followed by most later commentaries and accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:41).
I.e., there is no prohibition against hanging the curtain if one holds it upright. This, however, is difficult when hanging a large curtain. Inevitably, one will hold one portion of the curtain with one's left hand and fold at least a handbreadth or more over with one's right hand while hanging it. Thus, a temporary tent will have been created.
This represents the Rambam's conception of the passage in Shabbat 138b, the source for this halachah. Although the Ra'avad and others interpret that passage differently, the Rambam's view is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 315:12). (See also the final clause of Halachah 29 and notes.)
I.e., in contrast to the canopy described in Halachah 29.
Similarly, removing the cover is forbidden, since it is considered to be demolishing a tent (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 315:19).
The Maggid Mishneh mentions that this restriction applies only when there is a handbreadth or more of empty space in the jug. This qualification is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 315:13).
The Maggid Mishneh also mentions that the Rashba and the Ra'avad interpret Shabbat 139b, the source for this halachah, differently, and therefore reach a more lenient decision. Although their view is mentioned by the later authorities, the general consensus is to follow the Rambam's ruling.
See Chapter 21, Halachah 17, and notes.
Rashi (Shabbat, loc. cit.) interprets the passage that serves as the source for this halachah as the Rambam does. Others, however, explain that this restriction was instituted to make one deviate from one's ordinary practice as a safeguard associated with the forbidden labor of sifting.


U.S. District Court Judge John A. Tunheim Thursday placed a temporary injunction on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the FM Area Diversion Board of Authority, forcing all construction work on the FM Area Diversion Project to cease.
Construction on the Project began this spring, but will now be stopped.
"We will need to consult with the Corps over what changes in the federal project can be made consistent with federal law. My expectation is that this ruling will be immediately appealed as it is estimated that the cost of construction increases the total cost by $60 Million a year and we simply cannot live with that level of financial risk, or the risk to public safety of not having protection," Mahoney said.


When it comes to big names in UK dance music, they don't come bigger than Carl Cox. The larger-than-life DJ and producer has been delivering smiles to clubbers since the mid-'80s, so it's particularly serendipitous that he'd deliver to us the stems of his 1996 techno classic "The Player." Bush Records just recently released a special set of "Player" reinterpretations entitled The Player (Beats and Dubs) from the likes of Onionz, Spettro, Jake Childs, and more, but now it's your turn to bust out a floor-filling remix of the track.
The grand-prize winner will snag a Vestax Spin with NEO Cables, and have his or her remix released on Bush. The submission phase starts March 19th and ends April 2nd, so get cracking!


We cannot change an address after your order has been placed. We apologize, but we can't mark your order as a gift. The item "Oakley EVZero Swift Clear-Grey Photochromic Sport Men's Sunglasses" is in sale since Thursday, November 15, 2018. This item is in the category "Clothing, Shoes & Accessories\Men's Accessories\Sunglasses & Sunglasses Accessories\Sunglasses". The seller is "leperfect" and is located in Brooklyn, New York.


text:
Visit our members area
At home kits
MeditationsBlogContact
Making Workplaces Happier Spaces
Most workplace environments aren't designed to maximise positive mental health
The Deloitte 'Mental Health and Employers' report makes for a sobering read, finding that a sixth of workers are experiencing a mental health problem at any one time, with costs to UK employers increasing by 16% since 2017, to a massive £45 billion. Workplace stress is an epidemic.
It's essential reading for anyone in the mental health field, but mostly for those responsible for employee wellbeing at work; giving deep insight into how employers and employees can work together to improve standards, as well as gain ROI from wellbeing programmes (on average for every £1 invested, employers received £5 back).
But one thing was missing: the workspaces themselves.
Put simply, most workplace environments aren't designed to maximise positive mental health. Yet office design barely got a mention in the report.
Science shows that our environments affect our mental health and yet most workplaces have plenty of space, but no dedicated private areas for people to take five. Least of all a section dedicated to boosting mental health and employee wellbeing.
And perhaps it's not something you've considered before, after all it doesn't get discussed much. We all fall into apathetic ways; this is just the way that work is.
We need change, however – and urgently.
Designing for wellbeing
I was lucky enough to speak at a co-living meet-up on the topic of designing for wellbeing, featuring some of London's most promising up-and-coming designers and architects.
Co-living is a growing movement that addresses the problem of loneliness in our society head on.
It's a growing issue, and one that Natasha Reid, the other speaker on the night, spoke about: "Loneliness can be as damaging to our health as smoking 15 cigarettes a day".
The need to design environments – at home and work – that combat issues of mental health, are much needed it seems.
This got me thinking about the balance between private and public spaces in general. We go from one extreme to another in London. On the one hand, loneliness is becoming an epidemic. On the other, overpopulation makes the city feel like it's at bursting point at times.
So thinking about shared spaces where we can co-exist harmoniously has never been more necessary; but what thought is given to private spaces where we can have a moment of peace on our own? The office design process doesn't seem to plan for this.
Simple solutions can be the most impactful
I've written before about the benefits of meditation, which is scientifically proven to help a myriad of mental health issues. I've also written about the lack of suitable quiet spaces at work, for those needing a bit of time-out amidst growing to-do lists and stakeholder pressures.
If we are to combat mental health and employee wellbeing issues in the workplace by starting with something as simple (yet impactful) as meditation, often the only option for employees is to do it in the toilets; and I don't need to spell out the obvious disadvantages of this as a location for tranquility. Surely we can do better than this.
A quiet moment to ourselves can help in many ways; to help refocus, reset or recharge. We'll all work better as a result, says the Deloitte report.
The need for some respite at work, I should be clear, is nothing to be ashamed of. It should in fact be celebrated. It's not about hiding away from people, but taking a positive step to improve your mental health and effectiveness.
History is full of examples of people stepping into nature on their own to find solitude and peace; for some tribes, solitary time in the wilderness is still an important initiation rite. So it's not a new human need, but something that's become harder to access in our always-on world and open plan offices.
How do we bring some of the fundamentals of human-centric design into workplaces, in a way that blends the need for a work-hard attitude with the empathy we all need to look after our mental health and each other?
Are more private spaces a solution? We'll only know if we try.
I'd love to hear how your workplace is tackling some of the issues raised here.
Leigh Chapman
Founder at Yinshi
Managing mental health at work
Some tips on how to how boost wellbeing as we return to the office
Future of Workplace Wellbeing Webinar
Quickfire Q&A with Matt Morley
Sign up to our newsletter to receive the latest Yinshi news and meditation tips
I have read and agree to the privacy policy and terms and conditions
HomeAboutOur productsMeditationsBlog
ContactMembers areaTerms and conditionsPrivacy policy

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
November 4th, 2014 by Murray Lewis
GTA V will have first-person mode on PC
It was rumoured for some time that the remastered version of GTA V would have a first-person perspective mode - now Rockstar have confirmed it.
The official word is that players can switch between first- and third-person modes whenever they want, and it all works in multiplayer, too. Accompanying this feature is an array of control tweaks to make the game feel great however you choose to play - and we'll be hoping that means no mouse acceleration on PC.
Other interesting features confirmed by Rockstar include:
Support for resolutions up to 4k,
Reworked special effects and lighting,
32 new vehicles,
100+ new music tracks,
and 20 new species of wildlife to coo at.
It's all shaping up to be quite the re-release, and certainly worth the wait until January when the game is released for PC.
I held off buying GTA V, knowing that a PC version would be coming. What about you? If you bought the game already, will you be getting this new version?


text:
Слагалица Да полудиш се састоји од четири коцке чије су странице обојене неком од четири боје (најчешће црвена, плава, зелена и бела). Циљ игре је направити стуб од коцкица тако да свака страна (предња, задња, лева и десна) стуба садржи сваку од четири боје. Распоред боја на свакој засебној коцки је јединствен.

Проблем се решава помоћу теорије графова, граф са четири чвора означених са Б,З,Ц,В (плаво, зелено, црвено и бело) служи за представљање сваке од коцки; грана између два чвора постоји ако су две боје које представљају чворове на супротним странама коцке, чвор има петљу ако су боје које се налазе на супротним странама коцке исте. Методом "узалудних покушаја" овај проблем се решава веома споро, јер постоји 41,472 комбинације, од којих су само две решење слагалице. Верзија слагалице са четири (или више) коцке је НП-комплетна.

Слагалицу је осмислио Франц Овен Армбрустер, познат као Франк Армбрустер, а објавили су је браћа Паркер 1967. Продато је преко 12 милиона копија слагалице. "Да полудиш" је слична бројним слагалицама, међу којима је и Катценјаммер, патентирана од стране Фредерика А. Шосова 1900 године, и "Танталове муке" (приближно 1940, то је најпопуларније име ове игре пре "Да полудиш"). Слагалице користе подскуп од 30 коцки осмишљених од стране Персија Александра МекМахона, али није познато да ли су креатори слагалица знали за МекМахонове коцке.

Решење проблема са четири коцке
Имамо четири коцке обојене са четири различите боје (црвена, зелена, плава и бела), покушаћемо да генеришемо граф који јасно представља све позиције боја на свим коцкама. Резултујућ граф садржи четири чвора (по један за сваку боју) и означићемо гране бројевима од један до четири (по један број за сваку коцку). Ако грана спаја два чвора (нпр. црвени и зелени) и број гране је три, то онда значи су на трећој коцки боје црвена и зелена на различитим странама коцке.

Слика 1 приказује четири коцке и њихове боје.

Слика 2 приказује граф генерисан на основу четири коцке.

Да бисмо нашли решење проблема потребно је да утврдимо како су уређене боје на свакој од четири стране стуба, за сваку коцку. Да бисмо представили распоред боја на супротним странама стуба (за сваку коцку) потребан нам је усмерени подграф (два смера представљају две супротне стране).

Дакле, ако имамо два усмерена подграфа можемо да представимо све четири стране (које су битне), за сваку коцку.
 Први усмерени граф представља предње и задње стране.
 Други усмерени граф представља леве и десне стране.

Не можемо насумично изабрати било која два подграфа - дакле, који је критеријум за одабир?

Ове графове треба одабрати тако да:
 два пографа немају заједничких грана, јер ако постоји заједничка грана то значи да бар једна коцка има пар супротних страница тачно исте боје. Пример: коцка има црвену и плаву напред и позади као и лево и десно.
 подграф садржи само једну грану за сваку коцку, јер подграф мора да објасни све коцке и једна грана може у потпуности да представља пар супротних страна.
 пограф може садржати само чворове степена два, јер чвор степена два означава да боја може бити присутна на страницама две коцке. Лак начин да се разуме је да има осам страница које морају једнако бити подељене у четири боје. Дакле две по боји.

После разумевања ових услова ако покушамо да изведемо два подграфа можда ћемо завршити са једним од могућих распореда, као што је приказано на слици 3. Свака обојена грана представља коцку.

Из првог подграфа ћемо извести боје предње и задње стране одговарајуће коцке. На пример:

 црна стрелица из жутог ка плавом чвору говори нам да прва коцка напред има жуту боју а позади плаву.
 плава стрелица из зеленог ка жутом чвору говори нам да друга коцка напред има зелену боју а позади жуту.
 наранџаста стрелица из плавог ка црвеном чвору говори нам да трећа коцка напред има плаву боју а позади црвену.
 љубичаста стрелица из црвеног ка зеленом чвору говори нам да четврта коцка напред има црвену боју а позади зелену.

Из другог подграфа ћемо извести боје леве и десне стране одговарајуће коцке. На пример:

 црна стрелица из црвеног ка жутом чвору говори нам да прва коцка лево има црвену боју а десно зелену.
 плава стрелица из плавог ка црвеном чвору говори нам да друга коцка лево има плаву боју а десно црвену.
 наранџаста стрелица из жутог ка плавом чвору говори нам да трећа коцка лево има жуту боју а десно плаву.
 љубичаста стрелица из зеленог ка жутом чвору говори нам да четврта коцка лево има зелену боју а десно жуту.

Трећа слика показује стуб који је решење проблема.

Референце

НП-комплетни проблеми
Рачунарски проблеми у теорији графова
Комбинаторне загонетке

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


For the Slashdot crowd this is a couple of days old news. OpenMoko launched their phone that runs on a "GNU / Linux based open software development platform" and allows "full access to OpenMoko source". And of course it's labeled as the iPhone killer. People have a lot of labels that they don't know what to do with just lying around. And they tend to slap them on stuff whenever opportunity arises.
But the "open phone" issue and its implications are obvious here. At first you may be inclined to think about this product as being open source. The reality is that, even if the electronics inside are well documented and cost friendly choices from different manufacturers, the hardware is not open source. There's a company that manufactures the actual phone by putting together the pieces and selling it. They made the effort of opening the software platform to the community. But it's still about the money. Sticking an OS tag on a product and throwing the software problem in the OS crowd's yard is a good strategy for building a business. It's cost effective and it looks good in the headlines.
But can hardware be open sourced?
This question has been brewing in my head since my monobuddies launched the Open Source Car initiative. In short OScar. The problem is like with this phone but obviously at a larger scale. You have a community of dedicated people who share real interest towards developing a particular type of hardware. How can these individuals work together, share ideas and shape them into a design a commercially feasible product can be built on?
So how can you achieve the end result in an Open Source manner?
I am not convinced that this can be entirely done. The factors that make it hard are the same that differentiate it from Software Development. The end product needs more than time and brain matter. I think that for now it ends at the blueprints.
We can open source the ideas and the designs but we must out source the production. Both these two concepts are good for the global community. Some people may not like one or another. Or both. But in reality there are bigger forces that dictate the economical choices people and companies make. The same big companies that would regard an open source product as a real threat already master the production outsourcing game. The real power lies in the ideas and they currently keep large staffs of engineers on their payrolls to come up with the ideas that provide their competitive advantage.
It's really the experts who need to step up and encourage the movement towards an open source mentality shaped to fit the particularities of the field they're involved in. And maybe, because they are used to getting the palpable final result, they get stuck at trying to find ways to include the end production in the overall process. I really doubt that this can ever be shaped into an open source model. Improving the out source process is and will be the way to go.
We all need to remember that open source used to be the means and not the goal. It's only lately that labels went on sale.


text:
Etheria is a genus of freshwater oysters in the Etheriidae family of mollusk bivalves, and a part of the Unionida order. The genus includes a single species, Etheria elliptica, that is found throughout Africa and Madagascar.

Etheria elliptica was first described by Lamarck in 1807, and lives in river basins along the Nile, Lake Tanganyika and Lake Victoria, and in Chad, Zaire, Niger, Senegal, and Angola.

Etheria are found as fossils at paleontological sites in Africa, including at Lake Turkana 3-5 million years ago. It first appears in the Miocene in northeast Zaire.

References

Etheriidae
Bivalves described in 1807
Monotypic mollusc genera


Plain English is a way of writing based on the concept that any educated person should be able to be read a document and understand it on first reading.
If you can already speak and write in English at an upper intermediate level, plain English will help you to communicate more effectively.
WHERE CAN I LEARN PLAIN ENGLISH?
Joanna Richardson's tailor-made written and oral courses address the specific needs of the Spanish-speaking professional in today's globalized workplace.


On Boxing Day, a Sunday service operates. There is no service on Christmas Day. On working Mondays to Fridays around Christmas and New Year, a Saturday service operates. The precise dates of operation depend on the day of the week on which Christmas Day falls.
Temporary diversion and change to last stop at West Croydon 12/08/15. Timetable otherwise as 13/04/15. Temporary change to first stop at West Croydon continued.


There are many things that go into making a successful business, from effective advertising to getting the best products for consumers, but all of them ultimately tie back to the employees. They are the face of the business and therefore need to have a system of solid policies in place so that operations can run smoothly and coworker relationships are positive. Unfortunately, no matter how many safeguards you implement, you are eventually going to have some workers who simply do not work well within these systems and cause trouble for the rest of the employees and, by extension, the entire company. To that end, it is crucial that you have the best tools to correctly handle incidents, such as theft, with strong disciplinary action.
The best disciplinary business policies are the ones that actively discourage poor behavior from taking root in the workplace at all. In order to accomplish this, you need to make sure that each one of your employees has a clear understanding of what is expected in terms of attitudes toward one another and toward customers. If you commend workers who abide by these expectations, you reinforce the value you place on them while also subtly showing that you believe in your policies. By following your own rules, you foster a sense of respect that works against insubordinate behavior.
Verbally informing your workers of the approach you want them to take in their work is great for demonstrating your firm belief in your policies, but you should also put these rules into written form. Not only do your expectations need to be in this document, but the consequences for violating any policies need to be included as well. This again feeds into the idea of preventing counterproductive behavior while also giving you something concrete to point to if and when you do need to discipline someone. Be sure that you keep the language of this writing general in nature, however, as too much specificity can come back to bite you when you need to address a violation.
The worst thing you can do for the credibility of your workplace behavior rules is to avoid taking action when one or more of them are violated by an employee. However, performing disciplinary action for serious offenses can be an emotionally taxing time for everyone involved. Here are a few ways to keep your actions professional, decisive and effective.
Maintain Privacy. At one point or another, you've probably seen a business owner or manager disciplining or berating one of his or her employees in front of customers and other workers. This is a huge mistake for several reasons. It encourages the spreading of gossip around the workplace, discourages some customers from returning to your business and further ingrains feelings of animosity within the person being reprimanded. All of these ultimately inhibit overall productivity. Instead, talk privately with the individual and address the situation with a level head.
Don't Beat Around the Bush. When you know that a rule has been violated, there is no reason to hold off punishment. This only causes your other employees to question your resolve and may indeed allow the bad behavior to spread. Additionally, tackling the problem immediately allows you to get a quick read on whether the offending individual is really willing to change for the good of the company.
Be Honest. There is no need for you to soften the blow when you confront a misbehaving employee. Keep the private meeting focused on what the problems are and make some suggestions for how the employee can fix them.
The most important thing you can do with regard to laying out your expectations and disciplinary policies is to be unafraid to enforce them. If an employee is truly worth keeping, he or she will make changes and the business will move forward.


The Greater Mondawmin neighborhoods were asked to think about the lights they notice in their neighborhood and what makes them feel safe. Their responses were then cnc-etched into the the surface of the three structures that comprise Beacon and illuminated with led lights. This site in Hanlon Park, also became the endpoint of the Safety in Numbers Parade and the site for Safe and Sound: A night of Performances in Hanlon Park.
In response to the death of Freddy Gray at the hands of Baltimore City Police Department, Long Walk is a public intervention and performance that took place in the days following the Baltimore uprising of 2015.
A list of 2800 names of individuals killed by police in the United States from May 1, 2013 - May 1, 2015 was written in chalk on the sidewalk spanning a little over .75 miles. Starting at Baltimore Penn Station and ending at the Washington Monument in Mt. Vernon. Passersby who stopped to inquire about the list of names were invited to participate in writing names. There were over 35 participants who helped document the lives lost over a span of three days. After the list was completed, the names remained visible for almost two weeks.
This video shows a little over half of the first block of 9 after the first day. There are about 200 names here.
A collection of images from the ground up and day to night; auto glass on sidewalks, invasive plants taking over sidewalks and abandoned rowhomes, direct tv satellite dishes, and a helicopter search light.


A simple way to give your fireplace a different look is with a new coat of paint. Consider covering your mantel with a bold splash of color to make it the room's focal point, or use a neutral color that matches your walls if you'd prefer a sleek, built-in look.
The fireplace mantel is often used to bear cherished family photos and heirlooms. In addition to these elements, consider cycling other decorative features on your mantel such as cut flowers, a striking piece of art, or a decorative antique.
To add a contrasting texture to a bright and fresh room, use exposed brick as part of your fireplace scheme. Brick is also great for adding an industrial or contemporary look to the space. If choosing brick for the surrounds, try coating the mantel with a vivid paint color for a dramatic and modern appeal.
If your fireplace room has an old-world atmosphere with rich woods for furniture and molding, and cream colored walls, consider a large, dynamic limestone mantel to complete the space's traditional yet opulent style.
If you find that your family spends most of their time in the TV room rather than gathered around the fireplace, consider bringing these two features together. Find a new home for any pictures or paintings on your mantel and have a flat screen installed instead.
Always trendy and stylish, consider selecting a black-hued mantel to add a modern aspect to the rustic nature of your fireplace. For a cottage-chic appearance, give your traditional carved, wooden mantel a coat of low-sheen black paint.
To give your mantel a unique appearance throughout the year, keep its décor in tune with the seasons. For fall, incorporate a bowl of autumn fruits, spice-scented candles, brass candlesticks, and barren branches.