Rif Eruvin 12b {Eruvin 45a continues ... 46b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
12b

{Eruvin 45a continues}
and pursued them. They went in to take their weapons, and they {=their enemies} entered after them, and they {the Jews} pushed one against the other, and {inadvertently} killed each other more than the enemies killed. At that time, they {=the Sages} enacted that they should return with their weapons to their place.

Rav Yehuda cited Rav: If gentiles beseige Israelite cities, they {=the Israelites} should not go out {on Shabbat} against them with weapons and do not desecrate the Shabbat because of them. A brayta also says so: If gentiles beseige Israelite cities, they {=the Israelites} should not go out {on Shabbat} against them with weapons and do not desecrate the Shabbat because of them. When are these words said? When they {=the gentiles} come over monetary matters, but if they come for the purpose of killing, they {=the Israelites} should go out {on Shabbat} against them with weapons and do desecrate the Shabbat because of them. And by a city close to the border, even if they come regarding straw and stubble, they {=the Israelites} should go out {on Shabbat} against them with weapons and do desecrate the Shabbat because of them.

Mishna:
If one sat by the road, and stood up and saw that he was close to the town, since it had not been his intention, he may not enter. These are the words of Rabbi Meir.
Rabbi Yehudah says: He may enter.

Rabbi Yehudah said:It once happened that Rabbi Tarfon entered though it had not been his intention.

Gemara:
There is one who explains and says that since it was his intention to go to that city, then even though he mentions nothing now, Rabbi Yehuda said that he is like one for whom they are making an eruv {techumin} in it, in which case it is permissible for him to go until that city, if he was within 4000 cubits {of the city}, and he is as if he made an eruv with his legs. Therefore, Rabbi Tarfon entered, without intention {beforehand} 2 techum of Shabbat, as if he made an eruv with his legs.

And there is one who says that our Mishna deals with one who established his Shabbat rest within the techum {of the city}. Rabbi Meir holds that since he did know that the city was close to him, within his techum, and he intends to establish his Shabbat rest within his techum, he has only 2000 cubits from his position, and if the city is at the end of 2000 cubits, he may not enter it, and if a portion of it is within his 2000 cubits, he may only enter into it until the end of his 2000 cubits {but does not have the whole city}. And Rabbi Yehuda holds that since if he had known that the city was close to him he would only have established his place of Shabbat rest with the people of the city, he has acquires Shabbat rest with them, and he permitted to enter with them to the city and to traverse the entirety of the city and outside of it {the city} 2000 cubits.

And this {latter explanation} is the logical explanation, and so did Rav Acha write.
And we establish the halacha like Rabbi Yehuda, for {in a dispute between} Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir, the halacha is like Rabbi Yehuda. And further, we learn explicitly in perek Chalon {81b}: Rabbi Yehuda cited Shmuel: The halacha is like Rabbi Yehuda. And not only that, but whenever Rabbi Yehuda teaches something in Eruvin, the halacha is like him.

Mishna:
If one slept by the road and did not know that night had fallen, he has 2,000 cubits in any direction. These are the words of Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri.
But the Sages say: He has only four cubits.

And Rabbi Eliezer says: And he is in their center.
Rabbi Yehuda says: He may go in whichever direction he wishes.
But Rabbi Yehuda agrees that if he chose for himself, he may not retract.

Gemara:
Rabbi Yaakov bar Iddi cited Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: The halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri.
And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: The halacha is like the one who is lenient by eruv.

And both {statements}, why do I need?
Rabbi Zera says: Both are needed. For if we say that the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri, then I would have thought that this was whether leniently or stringently. Therefore it informs us that the halacha is like the words of the one who is lenient by eruv.
To explain "lenient," that one who sleeps acquires Shabbat rest {=abode} just like one who is awake.
And to explain "stringent," that items of hefker {=ownerless}, according to Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri, acquire their own Shabbat rest {=abode}, and this is stringent. Therefore it informs us that the halacha is like the words of he who is lenient, that is to say that articles of hefker do not aquire Shabbat rest, just as the Sages say, and they are like the legs of any man {and can go with whoever picks them up}.

And let him just say that the halacha is like the one who is lenient by eruv, and there will be no need to say that the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri. {For Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri is lenient by sleeping and the Sages are lenient by articles which are hefker.}
Rabbi [Zera] said: I need it. I would have thought to say that these words are in the case of one individual against another individual, and many against many, but an individual against many, no. Therefore it informs us.

{Eruvin 46b}
Rav Papa said: I need it. I would have thought to say that these words were by eruvei chatzeirot {of courtyards} but by eruv of techum, no. Therefore it informs us that the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri even by eruv of techum.

Rav Ashi said: I need it. I would have thought to say that these words