Study Shabbat folio 103B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
therefore, the verse states “one,” which means one complete labor. How can the two phrases be reconciled? Rather it must be explained that one is liable only if he writes a small name that constitutes part of a longer name, e.g., Shem from the name Shimon or from Shmuel, Noaḥ from Naḥor, Dan from
R' Yosei said: And is one liable due to the labor of writing? Isn’t one liable only due to the prohibition of marking, as they would write symbols on adjacent beams of the Tabernacle to know which beam was another beam’s counterpart? Therefore, one who made a single scratch on two boards, or two scr
R' Shimon says: The verse states, “When a leader sinned, and he unwittingly performed one of any of the commandments which YHWH his God commanded not to do, and is guilty” (Leviticus 4:22), and from the word one, I might have thought that one is not guilty until he performs a complete labor, e.g.,
R' Yosei says that the verse states: “And did an action from one of these” (Leviticus 4:2). This unusual expression indicates repetition: And he performed one, and he performed these. From here it is derived that at times one is liable to bring one sin-offering for them all, and at times one is lia
The Talmud returns to the matter of the baraita: In any event, it was taught that R' Yehuda says: One is liable even if he only wrote two letters that are one type of letter; he does not insist that one is liable only if he writes two different letters. The Talmud answers: This is not difficult. Thi