ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafEruvin 17
ERUVIN 16-20 sponsored by a generous grant from an anonymous donor. Kollel Iyun Hadaf is indebted to him for his encouragement and support and prays that Hashem will repay him in kind.
(a) If Rav forbids three people to walk in a *five* Sa'ah area with a
Mechitzas Shesi or Arev, how can he then permit *seven*?
(b) Rav Ashi therefore explained Rav like this - if three people required
six Sa'ah, then even if they encircled seven, they are permitted to walk
there; whereas if they only required *five* Sa'ah, but then encircled seven,
they are not even permitted to walk the *five*.
(c) If 'u'Vilevad she'Lo Yehei Beis Sasayim Panuy' means Panuy me'Adam
(meaning that as long as, after allowing a Beis Sasayim per person, there is
not a Beis Sasayim extra (e.g. eight thousand Sa'ah for three people), the
Mechitzah is Kasher - then it is not clear why the Mechitzah should be Pasul
in either of the above cases.
(d) 'u'Vilevad she'Lo Yehei Beis Sasayim Panuy' - really means Panuy from
Kelim (meaning that there may not be a Beis Sasayim that is not actually
used). This explains why in the latter case - where there is a Beis Sasayim
more than is needed, they are forbidden to carry there.
(a) 'Shabbos Goremes' - means that we go by what the situation was when
Shabbos entered: if there were *three* people when Shabbos entered, then
they are permitted to walk any distance (even by means of a Mechitzas Shesi
or Arev), even if one of them died on Shabbos; whereas if there were only
*two* people when Shabbos came in, and a third person joined them on
Shabbos, they will only be permitted to walk a Beis Sasayim.
(b) The other holds - 'Diyurin Gormin', meaning that we go by the number of
people who are currently there, irrespective of how many there were when
Shabbos came in.
(c) Rabah's Sha'aleh what the Din will be if they made an Eruv by way of the
entrance or by way of the window, and the entrance or the window became
blocked on Shabbos - is whether we go after now, in which case there is no
Eruv, and carrying from one Chatzer to the other will be prohibited, or
whether we go after the moment when Shabbos entered, when there was a good
Eruv in effect, in which case, it will now still be permitted to carry from
one Chatzer to the other by means of other small windows which are in
themselves too small to use for an Eruv. Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah answered
Rabah that, since the Eruv was Kasher when Shabbos came in, it remains
Kasher for the entire Shabbos.
(d) Initially, we were uncertain whether it was Rav Huna who said 'Shabbos
Goremes' (the equivalent of 'Ho'il ve'Hutra Hutra'), and Rav Yitzchak,
'Diyurin Gomrin', or vice-versa - Now we say that it is Rav Huna who holds
(a) Rebbi Yossi holds - that if carrying is forbidden on subsequent
Shabbasos, it will also be forbidden on that Shabbos, too.
The Tana Kama (who says that when Chazal permitted a Mechitzas Shesi or Arev
by a caravan, they were simply stating the usual case, but that really, it
is permitted by one person, too) is speaking about a caravan and an
individual who are traveling, and that is where they permitted a single
person - but not an individual at home, who requires a proper Mechitzah consisting of Shesi and of Arev. Whereas the Chachamim are referring to the
words of Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah, who forbids a Mechitzas Shesi or Arev
wherever it is. Consequently, they are permitting it anywhere - even for a
private person at home.
(b) It is possible for ...
1. ... Rav Huna to agree with Rebbi Yossi - since in that case, the Chatzer
is now missing Mechitzos (and Rav Huna agrees that one cannot say 'Ho'il
ve'Hutra Hutra' to make Mechitzos that are currently non-existent - which
are d'Oraysa); whereas in Rav Huna's case, there *are* Mechitzos, and with
regard to the Eruv (which is only de'Rabbanan) we apply 'Ho'il ve'Hutra
2. ... Rav Yitzchak to agree with Rebbi Yehudah - who permits the Eruv
*there* because the members of both Chatzeros are still alive; whereas in
Rav Yitzchak's case, where one of the people concerned, died, we will not
say Ho'il ve'Hutra Hutra'. (Similarly, when one new member joined the group,
we also go after the current situation, to give them as much area as they
wish to walk there.)
(a) They also exempted soldiers - from having to separate Demai (crops
purchased from an Am ha'Aretz, who may not have given all his tythes to the
Kohen and to the Levi), and from the need for soldiers living in two
adjoining Chatzeros with a doorway in between one and the other, to make
(b) We are speaking about soldiers who go out to a Milchemes ha'Reshus -
i.e. any battle with the exception of the conquest of Cana'an (or the battle
(c) The second concession added by Rebbi Yehudah ben Teima - is that if one
comes across a dead soldier, one buries him on the spot.'
(a) Yehoshua permitted only wood which was still attached, whereas our Tana
permits even wood that is detached; and whereas, Yehoshua permitted only wet
wood (which does not make good firewood), our Tana permitted dry wood, too.
(b) No! Yehoshua only permitted cutting someone else's *wood*, which does
*not* stand to be harvested, but not crops, which *do*.
(c) 'Mes Mitzvah Koneh Mekomo' - applies only when there is no-one to bury
the corpse (which is gauged by calling out and there is nobody in the
vicinity to respond).
(a) Normally, we will apply the principle 'Mes Mitzvah Koneh Mekomo' - and
bury him there where we find him; unless he is lying across the street,
posing a major problem for Kohanim, who pass that way. In that case, it is
permitted to move him to the nearest spot that causes the least
(b) The order of priorities with regard to an unplowed field, a plowed
field, and a sown field - is precisely in that order: the Mes should be
buried if possible, in an unplowed field; if not, in a plowed field, and as
a last resort, in a sown one.
(a) The soldiers are exempt from Netilas Yadayim - before the meal, but
remain obligated to wash Mayim Acharonim after the meal.
(b) The reason that Mayim Acharonim is more obligatory than Mayim Rishonim -
is because,whereas Mayim Rishonim is a Mitzvah (which Chazal have the right
to waive - particularly as it is only mi'de'Rabbanan), Mayim Acharonim is a
matter of life-danger (due to the Melach Sedomis which it contains).
(c) Melach Sedomis exists only in small quantities, says the Gemara - as
little as one grain per Kur (thirty Sa'ah) - See Tosfos, DH 'Mayim', who
contend that nowadays, this salt is no longer common.
(d) Yes! Someone who weighs Melach Sedomis - *is* obligated to wash Mayim
(a) One is also permitted to feed Demai to the poor.
(b) The reason that Chazal were so lenient by Demai - is because in reality,
they knew that even the majority of Amei ha'Aretz used to separate Ma'asros,
and they issued the decree of Demai in spite of the majority.
(c) According to Rebbi Yanai, the soldiers are exempt from Eruv Chatzeros
(which is only mi'de'Rabbanan), but they remain obligated to make an Eruv
Techumin (if they intend to walk beyond the Techum on Shabbos), because
walking beyond the Techum is subject to Malkus.
(a) When Rebbi Chiya asks from "Al Yetzei Ish mi'Mekomo" - he is not
suggesting that, whenever the Torah uses the word 'Al', there is no Malkus,
because we know that one is Chayav Malkus for turning to witches, and there
the Torah writes "Al Tifnu el ha'Ovos ve'Al ha'Yid'eonim" (Kedoshim).
Hadran Alach, 'Mavoy'!
(b) What he is asking, according to Rebbi Yonoson - is: how can Rebbi Yanai
prescribe Malkus for walking beyond the Techum on Shabbos, since "Al Yetzei
Ish mi'Mekomo" includes the Isur of carrying (as if it had written "Al
Yotzi"), which is punishable by death; and any La'av which is punishable by
death, is not subject to Malkus?
(c) This is incorrect, answers Rav Ashi - since the Torah writes, not "Al
Yotzi", but "Al Yetzei", restricting the Pasuk to someone who *goes* outside
the Techum, to preclude someone who carries. Consequently, Rebbi Yanai is
justified in prescribing Malkus for someone who leaves Techum Shabbos on
Perek Osin Pasin
(a) A Deyumad is a dual post in the shape of half a square, each side
measuring one Amah. It is the acronym of 'Deyo Amud' - meaning two posts.
(b) The four Deyumdin are necessary - to create a Reshus ha'Yachid
surrounding a water-well or pit in the street, to enable drawing water from
it and watering one's animal on Shabbos; something that would otherwise be
forbidden, because it would constitute carrying from a Reshus ha'Yachid
(inside the well) to a Reshus ha'Rabim.
(c) Each Deyumad must be at least ten Tefachim tall, one Amah long and of no
(d) the maximum space permitted between one Deyumad and the next ...
1. ... according to Rebbi Meir - is ten Amos (two teams of cows, each
consisting of *three* cows)
2. ... according to Rebbi Yehudah - is thirteen and a third Amos (two teams
of cows close together, each consisting of *four*).
(a) The minimum space permitted between the outside of the well and the
Deyumad - is to contain the head and most of the cow. The reason that we
gauge the area of the Pasei Bira'os by where *the animal* stands - is
because we are afraid that the owner may be drawn after his cow whilst
watering it, and carry the bucket of water outside into the street.
(b) The maximum size of the area of the Pasei Bira'os, according to the Tana
Kama - is unlimited, provided the Deyumdin are lengthened accordingly (so
that one does leave more than the maximum permitted space between the
Deyumdin - as we learnt in the previous question).
(c) The Rabbanan said to Rebbi Yehudah (who permits a maximum area of a Beis
Sasayim) - that Chazal only mentioned such a Shiur with regard to a garden
or an enclosure (which is adjoined to a dwelling), but as far as a pen, a
coral [in the city], a storehouse or a Chatzer are concerned, there is no