(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Eruvin 31

ERUVIN 31-35 - have been dedicated by Mrs. Rita Grunberger of Queens, N.Y., in loving memory of her late husband, Yitzchok Yakov ben Eliyahu Grunberger, whose Yahrzeit is the 10th of Sivan.



(a) Both the Kohen and the Terumah need to be Tahor - because if the Terumah was Temei'ah, it would be forbidden to the Kohen, even if he was Tamei, and since we are dealing with Terumah Tehorah, the Kohen must be Tahor too; otherwise, he would be forbidden to eat it.

(b) The Terumah did not become Tamei (according to Rebbi Yehudah) - because we are speaking about a loaf which had not become 'Muchshar Lekabel Tum'ah' or that had been kneaded with fruit-juice (and not water), which is not Machshir.

(c) He must have carried the loaf on a straight wooden vessel, which does not receive Tum'ah, and which therefore cannot transmit Tum'ah to the Kohen.

(a) Chazal decreed the Din of Ohel on straight wooden vessels that are a Tefach wide or on round ones which have a circumference of three Tefachim. To avoid this Tum'ah de'Rabbanan - the Gemara establishes the Beraisa when he carries the bread on the thin edge (which is less than one Tefach) of the wooden vessel, which does not transmit Tum'ah at all.

(b) The Rabbanan disagree with Rebbi Yehudah, to prohibit making an Eruv with Tahor Terumah for a Tahor Kohen - because they maintain that one cannot acquire a house with something which is Asur be'Hana'ah - and a grave is Asur be'Hana'ah.

(c) According to Rava, who holds that 'Mitzvos La'av Lehanos Nitnu' - it is Rebbi Yehudah who holds that one may only make an Eruv for a D'var Mitzvah, the Rabbanan will hold that making an Eruv is permitted even for a D'var Reshus.

(d) True, according to the Rabbanan, the Isur of placing one's Eruv on a grave applies equally to Chulin for a Yisrael as it does to Terumah for a Kohen. However, the Tana mentions an Eruv of Terumah for a Kohen to teach us the extent of Rebbi Yehudah's lenient view; that he even goes so far as to permit that.

3) Rav Yosef, who holds that one may only make an Eruv for a D'var Mitzvah (and also agrees with Rava - that 'Mitzvos La'av Lehanos Nitnu') - explains the Machlokes between the Rabbanan and Rebbi Yehudah with regard to whether the owner of the Eruv is interested in benefiting from his Eruv after it is no longer needed. Rebbi Yehudah holds that a person is not really interested in the food, apart from the aspect of Eruv, which is why it is permitted to place the Eruv on a grave; whereas, according to the Rabbanan, he *is* interested in subsequently eating the Eruv, which is why they prohibit it.


(a) Making an Eruv with Demai is permitted, because of a 'Migu'- because it is possible to make one's property Hefker, when, as a poor man, it will be permitted to eat Demai.

(b) Beis Shamai forbids Demai to be fed to a poor man.




(a) The Chidush of the Mishnah, which also permits using Ma'aser Rishon whose Terumah was taken, to be used for an Eruv - is that this is so, even though *its* Terumah was taken (Terumas Ma'aser), but not Terumah Gedolah (like Resh Lakish, who says that when a Levi claims his Ma'aser Rishon before the Miru'ach (the flattening of the pile of corn - after winnowing) has been performed, then the Levi is Patur from separating Terumah Gedolah from what he received.

(b) We learn from the Pasuk "mi'Kol Ma'asroseichem Tarimu es *Kol* Terumas Hashem" - that once the Miru'ach has been performed, the Levi is obligated to separate Terumah Gedolah even from the Ma'aser Rishon that he claimed before the Kohen had received Terumah Gedolah.

(c) 'Idgan' refers to the five types of grain after Miru'ach, at which stage their status changes, and they are called 'Dagan'. From then on, they are Chayav Terumah.

(a) When the Mishnah permits Ma'aser Sheni and Hekdesh that have been redeemed to be used for en Eruv - it means that the owner paid the full amount for their redemption, but not the extra fifth (which the owner alone is obligated to pay). The Chidush of the Mishnah is that, even though, if even just one Perutah is still owing from the principle, the Hekdesh or the Ma'aser are not redeemed, that is not the case, when it is only the extra fifth that is still owing.


1. By Tevel, the Mishnah means even Tevel mi'de'Rabbanan - such as Tevel of crops that grew in a pot without a hole in its base.
2. By Ma'aser Rishon whose Terumah has not been taken - the Mishnah is referring to a Levi who claims his Ma'aser Rishon *after* the Miru'ach has already been performed, and the Chidush is to corroborate the Derashah cited above in 5b.
3. By Ma'aser Sheni and Hekdesh that have not been redeemed - the Mishnah means that have not been redeemed *properly*, i.e. that the Ma'aser Sheni was redeemed with an un-minted coin, and the Hekdesh with land - both of which are invalid.
(a) One may not send one's Eruv Techumin with a Cheresh, Shoteh or Katan.

(b) When the Tana of our Mishnah forbids sending one's Eruv with someone who does not agree with the concept of Eruv - he refers to a Kuti.

(c) When Rav Huna permits a Katan to collect the food for an Eruv - he is referring to Eruvei Chatzeros, whereas our Mishnah, which forbids it, is referring to Eruvei Techumin.

(a) Our Mishnah permits even using a Kuti for Eruv Techumin, provided the Kuti gives the food to someone else - on condition that the owner sees the Kuti giving it to the second person.

(b) We assume that the man to whom the Kuti handed the Eruv carried out his Shelichus - because of the Chazakah that a person carries out the Shelichus, once he undertakes it.
Note: See Tosfos (DH 've'Lichush') as to why the Gemara raises this point specifically here, when the Sheli'ach received the Eruv from a Kuti.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,