Sunday, December 04, 2005

Rif Eruvin 19a {Eruvin 61b continues ... 63b}


{Eruvin 61b continues}
And no one worries about Rabbi Akiva's opinion, but rather he may walk through all of it {the other city} and outside of it 2000 cubits, like the Tanna Kamma.

The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: If he established his Shabbat abode in a large city, even as {large as} Antioch, or in a cave, even as {large as} the cave of Tzikiyahu {the king of Yehuda, who tried to escape [see Yirmiyahu 52:7] through a cave said to extend from Yerushalayim to the plains of Yericho}, he may walk through the entirety of it and outside of it 2000 cubits.


BEGIN PEREK SIX - hadar im hagoy

If a person dwells with a gentile in a courtyard, or with a person who does not acknowledge the eruv, then this one restricts him. [These are the words of Rabbi Meir.]
Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: He never restricts, unless there are two Israelites restricting one another.

{Eruvin 62a}
All agree - both Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov maintain that the dwelling place of a gentile is not considered a dwelling {in terms of laws of Shabbat to restrict the other resident from making an eruv}. And they are arguing on whether there is a decree made to prevent the Israelite from learning from the actions of the gentile. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov maintains that since a gentile is suspect on bloodshed {a single Israelite will fear to live with him in a courtyard, and so} two {Israelites with a gentile}, which is common, the Sages decreed upon, but one {Israelite}, which is uncommon, the Sages did not decree. And Rabbi Meir maintains that there are times that it will occur and he will dwell with him.

And the Sages {who make this decree, in order to make this decree effective} say that an eruv does not work when there is a gentile present {in the courtyard}, nor does nullification of rights {in the courtyard} work where a gentile is concerned, unless he {the gentile} rents his right, and a gentile would not rent out his right, because he would fear witchcraft {not understanding the religious motive for the Israelites' actions}.

We may {effectively} rent from a gentile {his rights in the courtyard so that we are able to make an eruv} even for less than the value of a peruta. For Rabbi Tzadok bar Giyuri {our gemara: Rabbi Yitzchak son of Rabbi Yaakov bar Giyuri} sent {the following message} in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: Let it be known that we may {effectively} rent from a gentile {the aforementioned rights to the courtyard} even for less than the value of a peruta.

{Eruvin 62b}
Rav Yehuda cited Shmuel: The halacha is like Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.
And Rav Huna said: The minhag {custom} is like Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.
And Rabbi Yochanan said: The public conduct {nahagu} themselves like Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

{Taanit 26b}
We learn in Taanit, in perek Shlosha Perakim:
One who says halacha, we teach it in lectures. And one who says minhag, we do not teach it in lectures but we teach it as halacha {if one asks}. And one who says nahagu, we do not even teach it, but if someone acts in this way we do not correct him.

{Eruvin 62b resumes}
And in this, the halacha is like the one who says halacha {=Shmuel}. For Abaye said to Rav Yosef: Rav Yehuda cited Shmuel that the halacha is like Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, and furthermore, the teaching of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov is small in quantity but clear {=well sifted}. Is it then permitted to a disciple to give a ruling accordingly in a district that is under the jurisdiction of his Master? - for this is a clear matter (that it is permitted). Rav Yosef said: Even {the permissibility of eating} an egg {found in a slaughtered fowl} with kuchta {=a preserve containing milk} I inquired of Rav Chisda in the days of Rav Huna and he did not render any decision, even though it was a clear matter, for since the eggs were complete they are not a type of meat.

{Eruvin 63a}
Rava said: And to prevent one from committing a transgression it is proper even before him {his teacher}.

Ravina was sitting before Rav Ashi, and saw a certain man tying his donkey to a palm tree on Shabbat. He {=Ravina} called out to him but the man paid no heed. He {=Ravina} said: This man should be placed under ban. Ravina said to Rav Ashi: In such a case, do I appear as impertinent? He {Rav Ashi} said to him: {Mishlei 21:30}:

ל אֵין חָכְמָה, וְאֵין תְּבוּנָה-- וְאֵין עֵצָה, לְנֶגֶד ה. 30 There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD. {P}
{or perhaps: "in the presence of the LORD."}

In any instance in which there is profanation of the Divine name, one do not apportion honor to his master {by not speaking up in his presence}.

And Rava said {in the general case}: Before him {his master}, it is forbidden and he is {figuratively} liable to the death penalty. Not before him, it is forbidden and he is not {figuratively} liable to the death penalty.

They learnt {in a brayta}: Rabbi Eliezer says: The sons of Aharon died only because they rendered a legal decision in the presence of Moshe their master. What was the exposition they made? From Vayikra 1:7:

ז וְנָתְנוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן, אֵשׁ--עַל-הַמִּזְבֵּחַ; וְעָרְכוּ עֵצִים, עַל-הָאֵשׁ. 7 And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar, and lay wood in order upon the fire.
so even though fire comes down from heaven, it is incumbent to bring from ordinary fire.

And there was a certain student of Rabbi Eliezer who ruled a halacha before his teacher. He said to his wife, Imma Shalom: I will be astounded {alternatively: I wonder} if this one will live out the week {our gemara: year}. And he {the student} did not live out the week. She said to him: And are you a prophet? He said to her: I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet {a reference to Amos 7:14} but I have this tradition: Whoever renders a halachic decision before his teacher is liable to the death penalty.

Rabbi Abba bar Kahana {our gemara: bar Zavda; Kahana perhaps erroneously copied from the statement} said: Whoever sends all of his priestly gifts to one Kohen brings famine to the world. For it is stated {in II Shmuel 20:26}:
כו וְגַם, עִירָא הַיָּאִרִי, הָיָה כֹהֵן, לְדָוִד. 26 and Ira also the Jairite was chief minister {Kohen} unto David.
Now, was he a Kohen to David and to the rest of the word, no? Rather that he {=David} would send him all of his priestly gifts. And it is written {in the very next verse, in II Shmuel 21:1}:
א וַיְהִי רָעָב בִּימֵי דָוִדשָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים, שָׁנָה אַחֲרֵי שָׁנָה, וַיְבַקֵּשׁ דָּוִד, אֶת-פְּנֵי ה; {ס} וַיֹּאמֶר ה, אֶל-שָׁאוּל וְאֶל-בֵּית הַדָּמִים, עַל-אֲשֶׁר-הֵמִית, אֶת-הַגִּבְעֹנִים. 1 And there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David sought the face of the LORD. {S} And the LORD said: 'It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he put to death the Gibeonites.'
{This even though the pasuk continues and gives a different explanation for the famine.}

{Eruvin 63b}
Rav Brona said: Whoever sleeps in a curtained enclosure {=room} in which husband and wife rest, upon him the Scripture states {Micha 2:9}:
ט נְשֵׁי עַמִּי תְּגָרְשׁוּן, מִבֵּית תַּעֲנֻגֶיהָ; מֵעַל, עֹלָלֶיהָ, תִּקְחוּ הֲדָרִי, לְעוֹלָם. 9 The women of My people ye cast out from their pleasant houses; from their young children ye take away My glory for ever.
Rav Yosef said: Even if the wife is menstruant.

There was a certain alley in which lived

No comments: