(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 51

ERUVIN 51 - was generously dedicated by an anonymous donor in Los Angeles.


(a)  How long before nightfall must one designate his new place of residence (by the distant trunk of the tree) for it to be effective?

(b) Then how will Rava (the undisputed author of this opinion) explain our Mishnah, which writes 've'Chashchah Lo', implying that it would get dark by the time he reached the tree (two explanations)?

(a) Rabah suggested to his co-traveler Rav Yosef, that they designate a specific tree that he spotted in the distance as their Makom Shevisah.
What did Rav Yosef reply?

(b) What did Rabah answer him?

(c) Why did he quote Rebbi Yossi even though he never said it?

(d) What is the word *Nimuko* *(Imo) the acronym of?

(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Beshalach ...
  1. ... "She'vu Ish Tachtav"?
  2. ... "Al Yetzei Ish mi'Mekomo"?
(b) The latter Derashah is actually derived from a series of Derashos: 'Makom' from 'Makom', 'Makom' from 'Nisah', Nisah' from 'Nisah' ... 'Chutz' from 'Chutz'. The final Derashah is when we learn "u'Matza Oso Go'el ha'Dam *mi'Chutz* li'Gevul" (Matos) from the Pasuk in Mas'ei "u'Madosem *mi'Chutz* la'Ir ... *Alpayim* ba'Amah". How do we know to learn from *this* Pasuk, rather than from the Pasuk there "mi'Kir ha'Ir *va'Chutzah"*, (where the Torah writes *"Elef* Amah")?

(c) Since when must the words of a Gezeirah Shavah be exactly like? Do we not learn fr om a Gezeirah Shavah "*u'va* ha'Kohen" from "*ve'Shav* ha'Kohen" (that the second time the mark of Tzara'as appears on the walls of a house, one does not simply demolish it, as the Pasuk suggests, but first replaces the brick before giving it another week to see if the mark returns and spreads - just like he did when it appeared the first time) despite the fact that "u'va" and "ve'Shav" are not exactly the same?

(a) What do we learn from the word "es *Pe'as* Kedmah", mentioned in the same Pasuk in Mas'ei, in connection with the 'Gezeirah Shavah' quoted above?

(b) What then, is the problem with Rebbi Chanina ben Antignos, who holds that the Techum Shabbos of an indivudual is measured as a circle, and not as a square?

(c) How does the Gemara answer this Kashya, from the Pasuk "*Zeh* Yihyeh Lahem Migreshei he'Arim"?

(d) How do the Rabbanan explain the word "Zeh"?

(a) One is Chayav for carrying four Amos in the street.
What does four Amos really mean?

(b) Rava tested his disciples.
What did he ask them?

(c) What did Rav Papa and his friends answer?

Answers to questions



(a) According to Rav Nachman, Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah agree by 'bi'Mekomi', and they argue by 'be'Makom P'loni'.
What is the basis of their Machlokes, i.e. over which basic principle do they argue?

(b) In which case does Rebbi Yehudah agree (that a 'rich man' cannot make an Eruv without bread?

(c) Who is the author of the section of our Mishnah 've'Zu Hi she'Amru, he'Ani Me'arev be'Raglav', and what is the Chidush?

(d) And who is the author of the Seifa of the Mishnah 'Lo Amru Me'arvin be'Pas Ela Lehakel Al he'Ashir, she'Lo Yetzei vi'Ye'arev be'Raglav'?

(a) According to Rav Chisda, the Tana'im argue 'bi'Mekom P'loni, and not by 'bi'Mekomi'.
In which case do they agree?

(b) And in which case does Rebbi Meir then argue with Rebbi Yehudah?

(c) Who is the author of the Seifa of the Mishnah 'Lo Amru Me'arvin be'Pas Ela Lehakel Al he'Ashir she'Lo Yetzei vi'Ye'arev be'Raglav', according to Rav Chisda?

(a) The Beraisa supports Rav Nachman's interpretation.
Which two Chumros must we contend with, one according to Rebbi Meir, and one according to Rebbi Yehudah?

(b) What proof does Rebbi Yehudah bring for his opinion, from the poor men of K'far Shichin and K'far Chananyah, who made an Eruv on foot to go and fetch dried figs and raisins in a year of famine from the residents of Aruma?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah in the next Mishnah, permits someone who has set out on Friday afternoon to walk four thousand Amos to his house in the next town, to complete the journey, even though his friend initially convinced him to return. Why is only *he* permitted to complete the journey, and not the other residents of the town? How is this a proof for Rav Nachman?

(b) Why are we forced to say ...

  1. ... that the man set to go to his house in the second town, and not just be Koneh Shevisah
  2. ... that he owned a house in the other town too?
  3. ... that he did not say 'Shevisasi be'Makom Peloni'?
(a) What did Rabah bar Rav Chanan used to do every Friday when he wanted to walk from Artivna to Pumbedisa?

(b) What did Abaye say to him that forced him to retract?

(a) How does the Gemara try to prove that someone who makes an Eruv with bread has an extra four Amos (i.e. 2004 Amos), just like someone who makes an Eruv on foot?

(b) On what grounds is this proof rejected, leaving the Sha'aleh open?

Answers to questions
Next daf

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