ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafEruvin 47
(a) According to Rebbi Yossi, a non-Jew who goes away for Shabbos forbids
the other members of the courtyard to carry there - because he is liable
to return on Shabbos (and they failed to hire his Reshus from him before
Shabbos); whereas a Jew, who is unlikely to return on Shabbos, is
considered as if he had left the courtyard, and there is no need to
contend with him.
(b) Rebbi Shimon maintains that - even if a Jew just went to stay with his
daughter at the other side of town, the other members of the courtyard do
not need to contend with him, because, having moved to another dwelling
for Shabbos, he has not the slightest intention of returning on Shabbos.
(c) Rav rules like Rebbi Shimon.
(a) The poor man who Rebbi Meir permits to make an Eruv on foot - is a
traveler (who is considered poor because he is traveling, irrespective of
(b) According to Rebbi Yehudah, it is quite to the contrary: both a rich
man (who is currently at home) and a poor man are permitted to make an
Eruv on foot, and it is making an Eruv using bread that Chazal introduced
as a special concession for the rich man.
(c) The Gemara tries to prove from the fact that Rav found it necessary to
rule like Rebbi Yehudah, that Rav Mesharshaya is justified in disregarding
the rules mentioned above in the name of Rebbi Yochanan (one of them being
that Rebbi Meir, ve'Rebbi Yehudah, Halachah ke'Rebbi Yehudah).
(d) The fact that Rav disagrees with Rebbi Yochanan does not authorize Rav
Mesharshaya to disregard Rebbi Yochanan's rules - because of the hard and
fast principle that when Rav argues with Rebbi Yochanan, we follow the
opinion of Rebbi Yochanan.
(a) Betrothal is forbidden within three months of a brother-in-law or
husband's death - because Chazal decreed betrothal because of marriage,
which is forbidden in order to clarify whose baby it will be, should she
become pregnant shortly after the marriage or the Yibum.
Rebbi Yochanan needs to rule like Rebbi Yossi, in spite of his previous
ruling (in which he followed Rebbi Yossi as a matter of principle),
because here, that ruling might not be applicable, due to Shmuel, who is
quoted as ruling like Rebbi Meir, whenever he issues a decree (which is
the case here). Now Rebbi Yochanan might agree with that ruling, which
clashes of course, with his previous one ('Halachah ke'Rebbi Yossi' etc.)
Consequently, he needed to rule in this case like Rebbi Yossi (in spite of
Rebbi Meir's decree).
(b) Rebbi Yehudah permitted those who were married to become betrothed,
and those who were betrothed to marry, with one exception - namely, a
woman who had been betrothed in Yehudah, whom they forbade to get married
(or vice-versa), because the betrothed couples in Yehudah behaved with
unusual familiarity, and the chances of the woman being pregnant were
(c) Rebbi Yossi forbids a widow to become betrothed - as long as she is in
mourning for her deceased husband, but not because of the decree quoted in
(d) Rebbi Meir does not differentiate between one woman and another. All
women are obligated to wait three months, according to him, whether there
is a possibility that she is pregnant or not.
(a) The Tana permits the purchase of ...
1. ... houses and fields (from gentiles on the day of their festival -
either because he is depriving the gentiles of property in Eretz Yisrael,
or because of the Mitzvah to inhabit Eretz Yisrael (with Jews).
(b) Since it is permitted to purchase these things - Chazal also permitted
documentation of such a sale, even in a non-Jewish court.
2. ... animals and slaves - because he brings them into the realm of
(c) When the Tana permits a Kohen to even enter a graveyard if necessary,
to fight for these things in court, he means, not a regular graveyard
(because how can Chazal permit something which the Torah forbids?), but a
Beis ha'Peras, where a grave was dug up, and whose Isur for a Kohen to
pass through is only de'Rabbanan.
(d) Chazal also waived the Isur de'Rabbanan of *Tum'as Chutz la'Aretz* for
(a) Rebbi Yehudah restricted the concession of leaving Eretz Yisrael to
learn Torah - to where one is unable to find a suitable Rebbe in Eretz
(b) Rebbi Yossi holds that he is permitted to leave Eretz Yisrael - even
if he *can*, because one never knows from which Rebbe one will learn the
(c) Not even from here do we have any justification for Rav Mesharshaya to
disregard Rebbi Yochanan's previous rules. That is because Rebbi Yochanan
needs to rule here like Rebbi Yossi because here, we are dealing with a
Beraisa, and we might have thought that his previous ruling applied only
to Mishnahs, and not to Beraisos.
(a) When Rav Yehudah quoting Shmuel, states that objects belonging to a
gentile, do not acquire Shevisah - he means that they may be taken on Yom-
Tov, as far the Jew who acquires them.
(b) If objects of Hefker, which have no owners at all, do not acquire
Shevisah (according to the Rabbanan), then it goes without saying that
objects owned by gentiles (who themselves are not Koneh Shevisah) will not
(c) The Gemara therefore contends that Shmuel says his Chidush in Rebbi
Yochanan ben Nuri - to teach us that Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri's Din (that
Hefker objects are Koneh Shevisash) is restricted to objects of Hefker,
which have no owner who will interfere with their Shevisah; whereas with
regard to objects belonging to gentiles, he will agree that they are not
Koneh Shevisah like their owners.
(a) Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar rules that objects belonging to a non-Jew that
a Jew borrowed on Yom-Tov, or objects of a Jew which he lent to a non-Jew
and that were returned to him on Yom-Tov - may be carried two thousand
Amos on Yom-Tov.
(b) This can only follow the opinion of Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri, who says
'Cheftzei Hefker Konin Shevisah', and we see from here that Rebbi Yochanan
ben Nuri does not differentiate between Hefker objects and objects
belonging to a gentile. Both are Koneh Shevisah when Shabbos enters.
(c) Shmuel must hold like the Chachamim, and his Chidush is that - we do
not decree objects belonging to a gentile (to restrict them to two
thousand Amos) because of objects that belong to a Jew.
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Avin quotes Rebbi Yochanan, who disagrees with Shmuel
and says 'Cheftzei Nochrim Konin Shevisah, Gezeirah Ba'alim de'Nochrim Atu
(b) Rava permitted the Jews of Mechuza, who had made an Eruv which enabled
them to go to Mavrechta, to purchase the rams from the non-Jews of the
town on Yom-Tov (obviously having made the appropriate arrangements to pay
after Yom-Tov, or having paid in advance), and to take them back to
(c) Ravina objected to this on the grounds of what we just learnt in the
name of Rebbi Yochanan - like whom we rule even against Rav, and certainly
against Shmuel. So how could the purchasers lead the animals (who had
acquired Shevisah like their gentile owners) back to Mechuza?
(a) Rava's second ruling was - that the residents of Mavrechta were
permitted to purchase the rams (in spite of the fact that they had been
brought into Mavrechta from outside the Techum on that day.
(b) This follows what we learnt above, that someone who is forcibly taken
from his Techum into another town with a wall, is permitted to walk the
entire town (because a town with a wall is considered loke four Amos). The
rams too, were taken forcibly outside their Techum and placed inside
Mavrechta, which had a wall.