Eruvin 29a (כט.) — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

that

salkā concerning which Rav Ḥisda said that it kills a man refers

to

salkā that is

partially cooked but not fully cooked;

but when it is completely raw, it is fit for eating, and one may establish an eruv with it.

Some say

that this is

what Rav Hamnuna said: One may not establish an eruv with raw spinach, for

this

Rav Ḥisda said: Raw salkā kills a healthy man.

.

And this is how we challenge it:

But we see that people eat

it when it is raw

and do not die

[and they do not die]?!

And this is how we answer:

There—

this statement of Rav Hamnuna and Rav Ḥisda—

refers to partially cooked but not fully cooked;

Rav Hamnuna and Rav Ḥisda were not speaking of something that is completely raw.

Rav Ḥisda said: A dish of spinach is beneficial for the heart

and good for the eyes, and all the more so

is it good

for the intestines.

Abaye said: And this—

that it is beneficial and good—

is when it sits on the bottom of the pot and makes

an audible sound:

“tokh tokh!”

The dish was placed in the stove where the pot rested, and it cooked thoroughly and reduced until the spinach melted and boiled; and at the time of boiling it resembles something making the sound “tokh tokh.”

Rava said,

on one day when he was in a joyful mood: My mind is clear now, and therefore

I am

ready to respond sharply to anyone who asks me,

as

did

Ben Azzai,

who expounded

in the marketplaces of Tiberias!

In his generation there was no one as sharp and capable of uprooting mountains as he.

He said

—that is, he asked

Rava, a certain scholar: Apples—

how much

is the measure of food sufficient for two meals, so that they may be used for an eruv?

He said to him

—Rava:

Can one establish

an eruv at all

with apples?!

»

And we wonder at Rava:

But

is it the case that

one may not

establish an eruv with them?!

But we learned

in tractate Me'ila:

All foods

that are impure

combine

to form the measure necessary

to disqualify the body

[the body of the person who eats them] from eating teruma,

through

eating a measure of

half a pras

of impure food.

That is: half a “loaf,” when the measure of the “loaf” itself is half a “kikkar,” and a kikkar contains eight eggs. As explained below, on page 82b.

That is, impure food measuring two eggs.

And

likewise all foods combine

as food

to form the measure of

two meals—

the amount required

for

placing an

eruv

And

likewise all impure foods combine to form

the measure of an egg,

so that together they can

impart impurity

to another food

with food impurity

through contact with it.

And the Gemara explains the question from this Mishna against Rava:

And this—

what refutation

is there from this Mishna?!

If you say that it is because it teaches

in it

“all foods”

with regard to the food for two meals for an eruv, and from here one could learn that apples may be used for an eruv when they contain food sufficient for two meals,

and

because

these

apples too

are fit to be eaten,

and are included in “foods”—

It is impossible to say that this is the difficulty.

For

Rabbi Yoḥanan said

above:

One does not derive a rule from generalizations, even where the word “except” is stated

with regard to a particular matter; and it is entirely reasonable to say that apples are excluded from the generalization of the Mishna?!

Rather,

this is how we challenge him:

Because it teaches

in the Mishna:

“And food sufficient for two meals for an eruv, and an egg to impart food impurity”

This implies that anything capable of becoming impure with food impurity is also considered suitable food for an eruv.

And these

apples

are also capable of becoming impure with food impurity, and if so, they too should be suitable for establishing an eruv.

And how much

is the measure of apples for an eruv?

Rav Naḥman said: Apples

their measure is

a kav,

because this measure is sufficient to season two meals of bread.

He raised an objection

from that which was taught in a beraita:

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: A poor person who comes to the threshing floor to receive the poor man's tithe—for one may not give him less than food sufficient for two meals of the type being distributed, as will be stated below—is given:

An ukla

[one-eighth of a litra]

of spices

[because this is enough to season two meals],

a litra of vegetables, ten walnuts, five peaches, two pomegranates, and one etrog

. For sometimes a person seasons two meals of bread with all these [Ritva].

And

concerning this

Gursak bar Darei said in the name of Rav Menashya bar Shagavli in the name of Rav: And so

is their measure, all of them,

for an eruv

of תחומין, because the measure of an eruv is also food sufficient for two meals.

And now the difficulty is:

These

apples

should also be like peaches,

for five are sufficient for an eruv of תחומין; so why is it necessary to place a kav of apples for an eruv?!

And we answer:

These

peaches

are significant,

and it is not customary to eat more than five of them at a meal.

But

if

these

apples

were not significant,

people would eat more of them, and a kav would be required for two meals.

Rav Yosef said: May his Master forgive him

[may his Master, the Holy One, blessed be He, forgive him]

—Rav Menashya bar Shagavli

for erring and adding to the words of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar in the beraita dealing with a poor person receiving the poor man's tithe at the threshing floor the words “and likewise with regard to an eruv.”

For I said it to him

, for I am the one who said to him in the name of Rav, “and likewise for an eruv”; but I did not say it concerning this beraita. Rather,

I said it concerning the Mishna

[as I shall explain].

And

if

he

had erred and

said it concerning the beraita

of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar!

For Rav said it concerning that

which we learned: One may not give less to

any

poor person

—and the poor who come to take the poor man's tithe

at the threshing floor—than half a kav of wheat,

when the produce subject to the owner's tithes at the threshing floor is wheat.

And

one may not give less than

a kav of barley,

and of spelt, a kav and a half.

Because it is written concerning the poor man's tithe, “and you shall give,” and therefore a significant measure is required, one suitable to be called “a giving.”

Rabbi Meir says: Half a kav of barley, and a kav and a half of spelt.

And

they give him

a kav

[a volume measure]

of separated dried figs

[dried figs] in pieces,

or—

if he pressed them and stuck them together into a disk, they give him of them

a maneh

[a weight measure]

of pressed figs

[for once pressed-fig disks are made, the practice is to sell them by weight rather than by volume].

Rabbi Akiva says: Half a pras,

half a maneh of pressed figs.

And

they give the poor person at the threshing floor

half a log of wine. Rabbi Akiva

says: a quarter

of a log.

And

they give him

a quarter

of a log

of oil; Rabbi Akiva says: an eighth

of a log.

And all the other produce

that is not customarily eaten regularly or used to make a dip [Shenot Eliyahu on Pe'a]:

Abba Shaul said:

They give him

enough so that he can sell it

—the poor person—

and purchase with the proceeds food sufficient for two meals!

And

concerning this he

said Rav:

All the measures stated in the Mishna are for food sufficient for two meals.

And likewise

it is also

for an eruv

. Rav did not say this concerning the beraita.

And we wonder at Rav Yosef, who was strict with Rav Menashya:

And what superiority does this

Mishna have

over this

beraita?!

That is: What difference is it whether Rav said it concerning the Mishna or concerning the beraita? The Mishna and the beraita do not disagree; rather, the Mishna speaks of some types and the beraita of other types. Since this is so, there is no reason to insist that it be stated concerning the Mishna rather than the beraita. Thus, even if Rav Menashya had heard Rav himself explicitly say his statement concerning the Mishna, there would be no reason to object if Rav Menashya said it concerning the beraita.

The Ritva explained this as the simple interpretation, but raised a difficulty concerning it. However, from Rashi it appears that he interprets it this way.

If you say,

perhaps Rav Yosef was strict with Rav Menashya for this reason—

because it teaches in this

beraita: an ukla of

“spices.” And spices

—

are not fit to be eaten

; perhaps we should say that Rav Yosef held that for this reason one may not establish an eruv with them?

That cannot be said!

For

is it so that here,

in the Mishna,

it does not also teach “wheat and barley,” and

even though they

are not fit to be eaten

as they are, one may not establish an eruv with them?

Nevertheless, Rav Yosef said that concerning this Mishna Rav stated, “and likewise for an eruv!” Evidently, Rav did not intend to equate the law of an eruv with the law of the tithe with regard to the types of produce, but only with regard to the measures.

Since this is so, here too one may say “and likewise for an eruv” concerning the measures stated in the beraita; it refers only to the measures, not to the types of produce with which an eruv may be established.

Rather, because

of this Rav Yosef was strict:

because it teaches

in the Mishna that they give the poor person

half a log of wine.

And

we find that

Rav said

also with regard to an eruv:

One may establish an eruv with two quarter-logs of wine!

This is novel, since it would seem that one quarter-log should suffice, as with this measure wine is considered “a significant item” in every context [Ritva].

Infer from this: When Rav said, “and likewise for an eruv,”

he was referring to this Mishna!

And he was teaching us that an eruv specifically requires two quarter-logs of wine, corresponding to the significant measure of wine required for the giving of the tithe.

And we conclude: Indeed,

infer from this!

The Master said

in the Mishna cited above: “All foods combine, etc.,”

and food sufficient for two meals for an eruv!

Rav Yosef thought to say

: The foods do not combine

until there is a meal

complete

of this

type

and a meal

complete

of this

type. But two meals consisting of three or four types of food may not be combined, since there is no complete meal of any one type.

Rabba said to him

—to Rav Yosef:

Even

if there is of each type

half, a third, or a quarter

of a meal, they too combine.

In the main matter, Rav said: One may establish an eruv with two quarter-logs of wine!

And we wonder:

Do we really require all that?!

But it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says:

One who gives

wine

for an eruv must have in it a measure

with which to eat

[to soak bread in it] bread sufficient for two meals.

And one who gives

vinegar

must have in it

enough to dip

food sufficient for two meals [as it will be explained below].

Olives and onions,

he must have in them

enough to eat with them

[to season with them] bread,

food sufficient for two meals.

Since this is so, the difficulty is: Why do I need a measure of two quarter-logs of wine, which is the measure of two meals of wine alone? Surely for wine it is sufficient to have a measure with which to soak bread sufficient for two meals?!

And we answer:

There,

where we say that wine requires only enough to soak bread in it, refers to

cooked wine

[wine that has been cooked], which is significant for seasoning bread by soaking the bread in it. But with uncooked wine, there must be a measure of wine itself sufficient for drinking at two meals, namely, two quarter-logs.

The Master said: Vinegar—

enough to dip with it.

And we explain it:

Rav Giddel said in the name of Rav:

Enough to dip

food sufficient for two meals of vegetables

when the vegetables themselves constitute the entire meal. [Its measure is a quarter-log. Tosafot and Mishna Berura.]

Some say:

this is

what Rav Giddel said in the name of Rav: Enough to dip vegetables eaten at two meals

of bread. That is: the meal consists of bread seasoned with vegetables, and the measure of vinegar needed to dip the vegetables is the measure required for the eruv.

The Master said:

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says:

Olives and onions, enough to eat with them food sufficient for two meals.

And we wonder:

Can one establish an eruv with onions?!

But it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said

himself:

Once Rabbi Meir spent Shabbat in Ardiskaya, and a certain man came before him. He said to him

—that man:

Rabbi! I established

an eruv of תחומין

with onions

in order to walk

to Tive'in!

Rabbi Meir placed him within his four cubits,

because Ardiskaya was outside the תחום of that man's city, and he reached it only because he relied on his eruv [Ardiskaya was between his eruv and Tive'in].

Since anyone who goes beyond the תחום has only four cubits, and this man had established an eruv with onions, which are ineffective for an eruv, it follows that he had gone beyond his תחום, which was the תחום of the city in which he had spent Shabbat, and he was required to remain within his four cubits.

We see that onions are ineffective for an eruv, and Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar's statements contradict one another?!

And we answer:

It is not difficult!

This

—the beraita that says onions are ineffective for an eruv—refers to one who established an eruv

with their leaves

, since they are not significant and are poor for eating.

This

—the statement that one may establish an eruv with onions—refers to one who established an eruv

with the bulbs

[with the onion itself].

For it was taught in a beraita: If one ate an onion

and lay down

and arose in the morning and died, one may not say

and ask:

“From what did he die?”

—as though he certainly died as a result of eating the onion!

And

concerning this

Shmuel said: They taught this only with regard to one who eats the

leaves,

but with regard to the bulbs, we have no

reason to be concerned

about them.