← 安息日卷总目·第六章 妇人带什么出去
这不是译本，是辅读层。中文承载文本本身，并逐句标出哪些是塔木德自己的话、 哪些是 施泰因扎尔茨 补入的解释，以及哪些地方翻译必然有所流失。
谢法利亚 的 威廉·戴维森 版用 <b> 标出塔木德原文，其余为
施泰因扎尔茨 补入。下面的比例是逐句从这个标记算出来的，不是判断。
这一面每读 19 句，只有一句以塔木德自己的话为主。把这件事藏起来， 读者会以为自己读的是塔木德；标出来，他才知道自己站在哪里。
接上：这样行的女子便不得嫁与祭司——那事使她成了娼妓之身（托萨福）。
便不得嫁入祭司之家。
are disqualified from marrying into the priesthood.
那一件事使妇人成了 娼妓之身。
The act renders a woman a zona.
祭司便娶她不得（托萨福）。
It is prohibited for a priest to marry her (Tosafot).
驳道：未必如此。或者 撒母耳 的父亲不许她们并榻而卧，单是怕她们习于身旁有人。
革玛拉 驳这一说：不是，未必如此。
The Gemara rejects this: No, that is not necessarily so.
撒母耳 的父亲所以这样坚执，或者是因为他要拦住她们并榻而卧，免得她们习惯了身旁挨着别的身子，以致动了情欲。
Perhaps the reason for Shmuel’s father’s insistence was because he thought to prevent them from lying next to one another so that they would not become accustomed to sleeping with a foreign body, which could stimulate sexual desire.
「尼散月为她们造洁池」——正帮 拉夫 之说：西边下雨，幼发拉底河的水涨便是大凭据；他以为那时河里流水不洁人。
他在 尼散月 月里为她们造洁池。
And he made a ritual bath for them in the days of Nisan.
这正帮着 拉夫 所说的，因为 拉夫 说：西边（就是 以色列地）下雨的时候，那大凭据便是 幼发拉底河——雨季过后，幼发拉底河 的水便涨。
This supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav said: When rain falls in the West, Eretz Yisrael, the great witness attesting to that fact is the Euphrates, as the water flow in the Euphrates increases after the rainy season.
巴比伦北边（幼发拉底河 的源头所在）的雨水，大体与 以色列地 的雨水相应。
The rainfall in northern Babylonia, where the source of the Euphrates is located, is essentially parallel to the rainfall in Eretz Yisrael.
春天 幼发拉底河 水势之涨，正是冬天下雨的结果。
The increased water flow of the Euphrates in the spring is the result of the rainfall in the winter.
撒母耳 的父亲所持的是：在 幼发拉底河 里浸洗不能叫她们洁净。
Shmuel’s father held that immersion in the Euphrates would not purify them.
河要算作可凭浸洗得洁的河，须是那落下的雨水断不至多过自然涌流的泉水才行。
A river maintains its status as a river in terms of purification through immersion only if it is established that the rain water that fell would not exceed the naturally flowing spring water.
论洁池诸 哈拉哈，得洁有两样路数。
In the halakhot of ritual baths, there are two manners of purification.
一样是在积水之处浸洗（譬如积着不流、留在原处的雨水）。
The first is the immersion in a place where water is gathered, e.g., collected rainwater that does not flow and remains in place.
一样是在天然流着的水里浸洗（譬如泉或河）。
The second is immersion in flowing waters in their natural state, e.g., a spring or a river.
只是雨水惟有积着才洁人；流着的时候是不洁人的。
However, rainwater purifies only when it is collected; it does not purify when it is flowing.
他与儿子 撒母耳 不合：撒母耳 说河从自己的河床得福；这一句又与他自己另一句不合——惟提斯利月的幼发拉底河流水才洁人。
他与自己的儿子 撒母耳 意思不合，因为 撒母耳 说：河是从自己的河床得福的（依 高昂众 之解）；河里所添的水不是从雨来的，是从地底下的源头来的。
And he disagrees with his son Shmuel, as Shmuel said: The river is blessed from its riverbed (ge’onim); the additional water in the river is not from rainfall but rather from subterranean sources.
撒母耳 这一句，又与他自己所断的另一句不合，因为 撒母耳 说：水流着而能洁人的，惟有 幼发拉底河，且单在 提斯利月 月里。
And this statement of Shmuel disagrees with another ruling that he himself issued, as Shmuel said: The water purifies when flowing only in the Euphrates during the days of Tishrei alone.
夏天既不下雨，惟有那时才断得定那水实在是河水。
Since rain does not fall in the summer, only then is it clear that the water is in fact river water.
密释纳前款说「可以扣」（按理便许），后款却说「只是不可在安息日按理扣上」——阿巴耶 说后款单论钱币。
我们在密释纳里学过：妇人可以拿一块石头、一个坚果、一枚钱币扣住斗篷，只是不可在安息日按理头一回这样扣上。
We learned in the mishna: A woman may fasten her cloak on a stone, and on a nut, and on a coin, as long as she does not fasten her cloak with them ab initio on Shabbat.
革玛拉 问：这条 哈拉哈 的前一款，你岂不是说「妇人可以扣」么？——那分明是说她按理便可以这样行。
The Gemara asks: Didn’t you say in the first clause of this halakha in the mishna that a woman may fasten, indicating that she is permitted to do so even ab initio?
这前后相违，你怎么讲呢？
How do you explain the contradiction?
阿巴耶 说：密释纳的后一款，说的已经转到钱币这一样上了（那是密释纳所举几样中的一样）。
Abaye said: In the latter clause of the mishna we have arrived at the case of a coin, one of the examples cited in the mishna.
论钱币的这条 哈拉哈 是个例外。
The halakha with regard to a coin is the exception.
钱币安息日本是禁动之物，人或者要断定它一概用不得；纵然如此，所禁的也不过是安息日当天按理拿它扣住斗篷罢了。
Because a coin is set-aside from use on Shabbat, one might conclude that it may not be used at all; nevertheless, it is only prohibited to fasten the cloak on the coin ab initio on Shabbat itself.
阿巴耶 提一难：妇人用巧法，把斗篷扣在坚果上，好在安息日把果子带出去给孩子，这条哈拉哈怎么定？
阿巴耶 提出一难：妇人用巧法绕过律例，把衣裳扣在一个坚果上，好在安息日按许的样式把那果子带进公共区、给她的小孩子——这条 哈拉哈 该怎么定呢？
Abaye raised a dilemma: What is the halakha with regard to a case where a woman employs artifice to circumvent the halakha and fastens her garment on a nut in order to take the nut out in a permissible fashion to her young child in the public domain on Shabbat?
这一难两说都成立：依「失火可用巧法」的一位是一难，依「失火不可用巧法」的一位也是一难。
革玛拉 指出：依那说「安息日失火时可以用巧法」的一位，这是一难。
The Gemara notes: This is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat.
安息日许人多穿几层衣裳，好把它们从着火的屋里带出来。
One is permitted to wear several layers of garments to take them out of a burning house on Shabbat.
依那说「安息日失火时不可用巧法」的一位，这也是一难。
And this is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may not employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat.
细说前一层：那里许用巧法，或因不许他便要去救火；这里不许她，她也不至把果子带出去。
革玛拉 细说：依那说「安息日失火时可以用巧法」的一位，这是一难，因为两件事本有分别。
The Gemara elaborates: This is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat, as the cases are distinct.
或者那里所以许用巧法，是因为你若不许他那样把衣裳带出着火的屋子，他便要去扑火。
Perhaps there, artifice is permitted because if you do not permit him to take the garments out of the burning house in that manner, he will come to extinguish the fire.
这里却不然：你若不许妇人用巧法把果子带进公共区给孩子，她也就不把它带出去了。
However, here, if you do not permit the woman to employ artifice and take the nut out to her child in the public domain, she will not come to take it out.
细说后一层：那里穿衣裳出去本是常法，这里拿坚果当纽扣却不是常法，故或可许；此难存疑。
或者反过来：纵依那说「失火时不可用巧法」的一位，两件事也有分别。
Or perhaps, even according to one who said that one may not employ artifice in the case of a fire, there is a distinction between the cases.
那里论失火，穿着衣裳出去本是人把衣裳带进公共区的常法。
There, in the case of a fire, wearing garments is the typical manner in which one takes clothing out to the public domain.
这里却不然：拿坚果当纽扣用，本不是人把坚果带进公共区的常法。
However, here, utilizing a nut as a button is not the typical manner in which one takes a nut out to the public domain.
这样行既没有干犯 妥拉 之禁，你便可以说：她尽可以用巧法把那果子带出去给儿子。
Since no Torah prohibition is violated by doing so, say that she may well employ artifice to take the nut out to her son.
革玛拉 断道：这一难且存着不解。
The Gemara concludes: Let this dilemma stand unresolved.
新一段密释纳：截了腿的人可以带着他的木腿出去——拉比梅伊尔 的意思。
截了腿的人安息日可以带着自己的木腿出去，因为那在律上与鞋同论——这是 拉比梅伊尔 的意思。
One with an amputated leg may go out on Shabbat with his wooden leg, as it has the legal status of a shoe; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.