Translation:Talmud/Seder Moed/Tractate Shabbat/2b

the forms of consciousness of uncleanness are two which are four; the appearances of leprosy are two, which are four;  the carryings out of the Sabbath are two which are four. Now, why is it taught here, TWO WHICH ARE FOUR WITHIN, AND TWO WHICH ARE FOUR WITHOUT; whereas there it is [simply] stated, 'two which are four,' and nothing else? — Here, since the Sabbath is the main theme, [both] principal [forms of labour] and derivatives are taught; but there, since the main theme is not the Sabbath, principal labours only are taught, but not derivatives. What are the principal labours? — carryings out! But the carryings out are only two? And should you answer, some of these involve liability, and some do not involve liability — surely it is taught on a par with the appearances of leprosy: just as there all involve liability,  so here too all involve liability? — Rather said R. Papa: here that the Sabbath is the main theme, acts of liability and non-liability are taught; there, since the Sabbath is not the main theme, only acts of liability are taught, but not of exemptions. Now, what are the cases of liability-carryings out? But the carryings out are [only] two? — There are two forms of carrying out and two of carrying in. But 'carry ings out' are taught? — Said R. Ashi: The Tanna designates carrying in' too as 'carrying out.' How do you know it? — Because we learnt: If one carries out [an object] from one domain to another, he is liable. Does this not mean even if he carries [it] in from the public to a private domain, and yet it is called 'carrying out.' And what is the reason? — Every removal of an article from its place the Tanna designates 'carrying out.' Rabina said: Our Mishnah too proves it, because CARRYINGS OUT are taught, yet straightway a definition of carrying in is given; this proves it. Raba said: He [the Tanna] teaches [the number of] domains; the domains of the Sabbath are two.

R. Mattenah objected to Abaye: Are there eight? but there are twelve! — But according to your reasoning, there are sixteen! Said he to him, That is no difficulty: as for the first clause, it is well: