Good thing PETA wasn’t around in Rabban Gamliel’s time TB Shabbat 154

The 24^th chapter’s first Mishna legislates with a keen understanding of human nature. What should a person do if he is carrying his wallet Friday afternoon before Shabbat and realizes that he won’t arrive at home before Shabbat enters? Carrying the wallet on Shabbat is forbidden (the prohibition of hotza-ah- הוצאה). The rabbis realized that the person is unlikely to leave his wallet wherever he is because he doesn’t want to lose the money in it; consequently, he would most likely violate the prohibition of carrying an object four amot in a public domain as well as moving it from the public domain to the private domain. They figured out a way to solve this person’s conundrum. “One who was traveling on Shabbat eve and night fell, and Shabbat began while he was still en route, gives his money pouch to a gentile traveling with him. And if there is no gentile with him he places it on the donkey. Once he reached the outer courtyard of the city, where belongings can be securely placed, he takes the vessels that may be moved on Shabbat off the donkey. With regard to the vessels that may not be moved on Shabbat, he unties the ropes that attach his bags to the donkey, and the bags of vessels fall on their own.” (TB Shabbat 153a Sefaria.org translation)

 Today’s daf TB Shabbat 154 continues discussing all the ramifications of using your donkey to carry your goods Friday afternoon when Shabbat enters and how to avoid the prohibition of hotza-ah-הוצאה carrying from the public domain to the private domain which requires both ‘akira- עקירה, picking up the object, and hanakhah- הנחה, depositing the object down.) The Gemara tells a story that would have PETA up in arms.

“The Gemara relates: Rabban Gamliel’s donkey was laden with honey and he did not want to unload the donkey until the conclusion of Shabbat. At the conclusion of Shabbat, the donkey died of fatigue. The Gemara asks: Didn’t we learn in the mishna: He takes the vessels that may be moved on Shabbat off the donkey? Why, then, did Rabban Gamliel not unload the honey? The Gemara answers: This is a case where the honey had spoiled. The Gemara asks: For what use is spoiled honey suited? Why did Rabban Gamliel bring it? The Gemara answers: It can be used to rub on the wounds of camels.

 “The Gemara asks: And let Rabban Gamliel untie the ropes and the bags will fall on their own. The Gemara answers: It was due to the concern that the jugs containing the honey would crack. The Gemara asks: And let him bring cushions and blankets and place them beneath the jugs. The Gemara answers: He was concerned lest they become soiled and he would thereby negate the vessel’s preparedness, i.e., the cushions and blankets would be rendered unusable. The Gemara asks: Isn’t there the matter of the suffering of a living creature? He should suffer monetary loss rather than cause the animal to suffer. The Gemara answers: Rabban Gamliel holds that causing a living creature to suffer is prohibited not by Torah law but rather by rabbinic law. Therefore, he need not suffer monetary loss due to the rabbinic prohibition (Ramban).” (Sefaria.org translation)

I don’t understand how Rabban Gamliel would be more concerned about the monetary loss of the honey than the monetary loss of replacing the donkey let alone his position that causing a living creature to suffer (tza’ar ba’alei hayyim- צער בעלי חיים) prohibition is not Torah in origin. We’ll have to wait until we get to TB Baba Metziah 36a to see how he arrives at the conclusion.

 Thank God, the halakhah doesn’t follow Rabban Gamliel in our Gemara’s case nor in the understanding of the prohibition of tza’ar ba’alei hayyim. If you go back and read the entire sugiyah, you’ll see that Yosef Caro quotes our daf extensively. “When he reaches the outmost courtyard of the city which is guarded, he should remove the articles that are permitted to be moved on Shabbat from (the animal). And those not permitted to be moved, (the owner) should release the saddle straps to which the sacks are bound and allow the sacks to fall on their own accord. If (the animal was carrying a) burden of glass utensils, which are forbidden to move- for example the cups of bloodletters which are not fit to be used on Shabbat at all because they are loathsome- and if they fell to the ground they would break, he should bring cushions and bedding and place them below (the sacks). If however, the sacks are large and thus it is impossible to remove the cushions from beneath them, it is forbidden to place cushions beneath the sacks because he negates the possibility of using the article (i.e., the cushions, on Shabbat). Instead he should gently release (the sacks) from the donkey, so that they will not break. One may not leave (the burden) on the animal until Saturday night, because of the suffering this will cause the animal, (which is a Scriptural prohibition).” (Shulkhan Arukh, Orekh Hayyim, 266:9)