(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 24

ERUVIN 24 - Dedicated by Shari and Jay Gold and family in memory of Rav Dov ben Dovid Meir (Bennett Gold), whose Yahrzeit is 3 Sivan


(a) We have learnt that if one planted *trees* in the majority of the enclosure (of more than a Beis Sasayim), it has the Din of a Chatzer and is permitted. According to Rav Yehudah quoting Avimi, this speaks when they are planted 'Itztabla'os'.
What does that mean?

(b) What does Rav Nachman hold in this regard?

(c) What must one do if any case that the enclosure preceded the dwelling?

(a) What is Chizkiyah's Sha'aleh on the Mishnah in Kelim 'Kol K'lei Ba'alei- Batim Shi'uran ke'Rimonim'?

(b) 'Sandal she'Nifsekah Achas me'Oznav, ve'Tiknah, Tamei Medras'. It is not at first clear, why the shoe becomes Tahor when the second strap tears, since the first strap has already been repaired by then.
How did Chizkiyah explain this?

(c) How did Rebbi Yochanan resolve Chizkiyah's initial Sha'aleh from Chizkiyah's own explanation of the Mishnah in Kelim?

(d) Did Chizkiyah accept Rebbi Yochanan's explanation? What did he have to say about Rebbi Yochanan (two versions)?

3) What does the Gemara resolve with regard to ten independent breaches that occured at intervals, when each breach was repaired before the next one occured?


(a) What is the Din of a Rachbah behind a house which is more than a Beis Sasayim, and why is that?

(b) If the Rachbah has a door leading from the house, one may carry there. Under what condition is that?

(c) What is the Chidush?

Answers to questions



(a) If an enclosure that was more than a Beis Sasayim and that was built adjoining the dwelling, became filled with water, does that have the Din of an enclosure that has been *sown*, or of one in which *trees were planted*?

(b) Initially, the Gemara lays down two conditions under which one may carry there.
What are they?

(c) Which of these conditions is not accepted, and why is that?

(a) What was the case of that Rachbah in Pum Nahara? Why was it considered a Karmelis?

(b) What problem did it present with regard to the path at one end, and to the Mavoy on the other (as well as to itself)?

(c) Why is this case worse than the Mavoy which opened into the Rachbah on Daf 7b, which did not require any Tikun?

(d) What would have been the simplist thing to do under the circumstances, and why did they not do it?

(a) Why could they not rectify the Rachbah by simply erecting a wall above the river-bank, to serve as a Mechitzah for the Rachbah at the other end of the path?

(b) How would putting up a Tzuras ha'Pesach at the entrance of the Rachbah - where the path led into it, be effective?

(c) Then why did they not do that?

(a) Abaye suggested putting up a Lechi at the entrance of the path (where it led into the Rachbah) - which could be knocked into the ground, so as not to suffer the same fate as a Tzuras ha'Pesach would, and which would be effective due to a 'Migu'(similar to the one which we mentioned in 7b). Why would a Lechi not work without the 'Migu'?

(b) On what grounds does Rava object to Abaye's suggestion?

(a) Rava therefore concluded that they should place a Lechi at the end of the Mavoy, where it led into the Rachbah.
Was that the only Tikun that was required there?

(b) On what basis did the Lechi help rectify the Rachbah?

(c) What did the Lechi permit unanymously?

(d) What did the Lechi definitely not permit?

Rav Acha and Ravina argued about whether the Lechi permitted carrying from the Mavoy to the Rechavah or vice-versa. What is the reason of the one who maintained ...
  1. ... that it did?
  2. ... that it did not?
Answers to questions
Next daf

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