(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 3

ERUVIN 3, - dedicated to the memory of Sarah Dvosya bas Rav Mordechai (Feldman) of Milwaukee by her children.


(a) What are the 'Chamesh Amaltera'os shel Milah' referred to in Midos? Where were they situated?

(b) The Gemara asks that, according to Rav (quoting a Mishnah) in the Rabbanan, who learn the specifications of a Mavuy from the Heichal, an Amaltera (which means a cornice) should not help to render it Kasher.
What is the Gemara asking on Rav?

(c) The Mishnah in Midos is talking about the *Ulam*, so how can we ask from the *Heichal* on the Rabbanan?

(d) We will learn later in a Mishnah that a Koreh which is too weak to hold a brick is *not* Kasher for a Mavoy. There are however, times, when it *is*.
When is that?

(a) How does Rav answer the Kashya from the Beraisa on him (see 1b)?

(b) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak explains that, if not for Rav's interpretation of the Mishnah in Midos (quoted on Daf 2a), there would be no Kashya in the first place. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak accepts the latter Beraisa of Amaltera literally.
How does he interpret the Mishnah in Midos (which connects the Rabbanan's opinion on the height of a Mavoy, with the Heichal)?

(c) Why, according to him, is a Mavoy that is higher than twenty Amos, Pasul?

(d) Seeing as Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabbanan argue over whether one needs to see the beam at a glance, why do they need to repeat their dispute by a Sucah that is taller than twenty Amos (according to Rabah, who explains their Machlokes by Sucah in that way).

(a) Some explain Amaltera to mean 'patterned in the shape of birds'-nests', others, to mean 'long cedar poles'.
What is their Machlokes?

(b) Rabah renders a Mavoy where part of the Koreh is above twenty and part below, Kasher; whereas he considers a Sucah made in this way Pasul. The Gemara initially objects to this distinction on the grounds that, if the reason for the former is 'Kalush', then we should say Kalush by the latter, too.
What does 'Kalush' mean, and what are the objections to saying Kalush in both cases?

(c) How does the Gemara overcome this problem?

(a) The Gemara finally gives two explanations for Rabah, who differentiates between a Mavoy and a Sucah (which begin below, but rise to above, twenty Amos): one is that Chazal were more stringent by a Sucah, which is d'Oraysa, than by a Mavoy, which is only de'Rabbanan.
What is the other?

(b) Others reverse Rabah's statement: A Sucah is Kasher (when some of the Sechach is placed within twenty Amos) whereas a Mavoy is Pasul. Here again, the Gemara gives two explanations for this - one of them, because what is d'Oraysa does not require strengthening, what is de'Rabbanan, does.
What is the other?

(a) According to Rabah bar Rav Ula, both a Sucah and a Mavoy are Pasul if some of the Sechach or the beam protrude above twenty Amos.
What does Rava say? How does Rava differ radically from all that we have learnt about the Sechach or the Koreh (that are above twenty Amos) until now?

(b) How does Rav Papa prove his Rebbe's statement from the entrance of the Heichal?

(c) How does Rav Papa explain the Beraisa, which writes ... 'Meni'ach Koreh mi'Sefas Esrim *u'Lematah'*?

(d) If the Tana means *above* twenty Amos, then why does he write *'le'Matah'*?

Answers to questions



(a) To which two issues was Rav Nachman (quoted by Abaye) referring when he gave the Shiur Amah regarding a Mavoy as five Tefachim?

(b) Since Rav Nachman was coming to be stringent, how do we explain, according to him, the four Amos minimum length of a Mavoy - where small Amos would turn out to be a leniency? (two answers)

(c) What are the two ramifications of a similar statement that Rav Nachman made with regard to Sucah?

(d) How will Rav Nachman explain the minimum area of four Amos by four Amos that Rebbi requires for a Sucah? According to Rav Nachman, this will again be a leniency, and not a stringency (two answers)?

(a) With regard to Kil'ayim however, Rav Nachman holds (again le'Chumra), that an Amah consists of *six* Tefachim. He said this with regard to a Karachas ha'Kerem and Mechol ha'Kerem. What is ...
  1. ... a 'Karachas ha'Kerem'?
  2. ... a 'Mechol ha'Kerem'?
(b) Why do Beis Hillel require ...
  1. ... sixteen Amos by Karachas ha'Kerem, and why do Beis Shamai require twenty-four?
  2. ... twelve Amos in a Mechol ha'Kerem?
(c) What does the following Mishnah in Kil'ayim mean: 'Kerem ha'Natu'a al Pachos me'Arba Amos, Rebbi Shimon Omer, Eino Kerem'?

(d) Assuming that Rav Nachman incorporates *all* cases of Amah in connection with Kil'ayim, and assuming that he is coming to be stringent, as we explained above, what will do with Rebbi Shimon in the above Mishnah in Kil'ayim, where Rav Nachman's statement will be a leniency, and not a stringency?

Answers to questions
Next daf

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