Eruvin 29a — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

that

selek of which Rav Hisda said, “raw selek kills a person,” is speaking

of

selek that is

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

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

There are those who say

that

Rav Hamnuna said as follows: One may not make an eruv with raw spinach, for

this

is what Rav Hisda said: Raw selek kills a live person.

.

And this is how we challenge it:

But we see that people eat

it when it is raw

and they do not die [and they do not die]?!

»?!

And this is how we answer:

There, that is,

the statement of Rav Hamnuna and Rav Hisda,

is referring to partially cooked selek, and Rav Hamnuna and Rav Hisda were not speaking of something completely raw.

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

Rav Hisda said: A dish of spinach is good for the heart

and beneficial for the eyes, and all the more so

that it is beneficial

for the intestines.

Abaye said: And it—

that it is beneficial and good—

is when it sits on the lips and makes

a sound that can be heard:

“tokh tokh”!

For he placed the dish on the stove, where the pot was set, and it was thoroughly cooked and reduced until the spinach dissolved and boiled; and at the time of boiling it resembles something producing the sound “tokh tokh.”

Rava said,

on a certain day on which he was happy: My mind is clear now, and therefore

I am

ready to answer sharply anyone who asks me,

like

did

Ben Azzai,

who would expound

in the marketplaces of Tiberias!

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

He said

—a certain scholar

asked him, Rava: Apples—

how much

is the measure of food for their two meals, so that they would be fit for an eruv?

He said to him

Rava:

Do people make an eruv

at all

with apples?!

»

And we wonder about Rava:

A

person

does not

make an eruv with them?!

But did we not learn

in tractate Meila:

All foods

that are impure

combine

for the measure sufficient

to disqualify the body [the body of the person eating them,] from eating teruma ,

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

By

eating a measure of

half a pras

of impure foods.

That is: half a “slice,” while the measure of the “slice” itself is half a “loaf,” and in a loaf there are eight eggs. As explained below, on page 82b.

That is, impure food measuring two eggs.

And

so too all foods combine

as food

for the measure of

two meals—

the amount required

for

placing an

eruv

of boundaries.

And

so too all impure foods combine for

the size of an egg,

so that together they can

render impure

another food through

food impurity

by touching it.

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

And this—

what is the refutation

from this Mishna?!

If you say, because it teaches

in it

“all foods”

with regard to food for two meals for an eruv, and from here one can learn that one makes an eruv with apples when they contain food for two meals,

and

because

these

apples too

are fit for eating,

and are included among “foods.”

It is impossible to say that this is the difficulty.

For

did Rabbi Yohanan not say

above:

One does not derive from general statements, even in a place where “except” is stated,

meaning a certain matter, and it is entirely possible to say that apples were excluded from the general rule of the Mishna?!

Rather,

this is how we raise the objection:

Because it teaches

in the Mishna:

“And with food for two meals for an eruv, and an egg-size to render food impure.”

And it implies that anything that renders food impure is also considered food fit for an eruv.

And these

apples

too are fit to be rendered impure with food impurity,

and if so, they should also be fit for making an eruv.

And how much

is the measure of apples for an eruv?

Rav Nahman said: Apples

whose measure is

a kav,

because in this measure there is enough to accompany two meals of bread.

He raised an objection

from that which is 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 they do not give him less than food for two meals of the kind being distributed, as stated below—is given:

An ukhla [an eighth of a litra]

[one-eighth of a litra]

of spices [because with this two meals are seasoned],

[because this is enough to season two meals],

a litra of vegetables, ten nuts, five peaches, two pomegranates, and one citron.

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

And

concerning this

Gorsak bar Dari said in the name of Rav Menashya bar Shagavli in the name of Rav: And likewise

is their measure, that of all these,

for an eruv

of boundaries. For the measure of an eruv is also food for two meals.

And now this is difficult:

And these

apples

too, let them be like peaches,

for five suffice for an eruv of boundaries; and why is it necessary for an eruv to place a kav of apples?!

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,

and therefore more of them are eaten, then a kav is required for two meals.

Rav Yosef said: May his Master forgive him [may his master, the Holy One, blessed be He, forgive him]

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

Rav Menashya bar Shagavli

for having erred and added 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 was 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

concerning the Mishna [as I shall explain].

[as I shall explain].

And

if

he

had erred and

said it concerning the beraita

of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar!

For Rav said this concerning that

which we learned: They do not give less to

any

poor person

and poor people who come to take the poor man’s tithe

at the threshing floor than half a kav of wheat,

when the owner of the threshing floor’s tithes are from wheat.

And

they do 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 we require a significant measure, fit to be called “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]

[a volume measure]

of dried figs [dried figs] separated,

[dried figs] in pieces,

or—

if he pressed them and joined them into a disk—he gives him of them

a maneh [a weight measure]

[a weight measure]

of fig cake [for this is the practice: from the time that fig cakes are made into disks, they are sold by weight and not by volume].

[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 fig cake.

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 fruits,

which are not customarily eaten regularly and made into a dip [Shnot Eliyahu on Peah]:

Abba Shaul said:

They give him

enough so that he may sell them

the poor person,

and buy with them food for two meals!

And

concerning this

Rav said:

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

And likewise

it is also

for an eruv.

And Rav did not say it at all concerning the beraita.

And we wonder about Rav Yosef, who was particular 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 whether he 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 you will say that for this reason Rav Yosef was particular with Rav Menashya—

because it teaches in this

beraita: an ukhla

“of spices.” And spices

are

not fit for eating.

And let us say that Rav Yosef holds that for this reason one may not make an eruv with them?

This 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 for eating

as they are, one may not make an eruv with them.

Nevertheless, Rav Yosef said that Rav said concerning this Mishna, “And likewise for an eruv”! It follows that Rav did not intend to equate the law of an eruv with the law of the tithe with regard to the kinds, but rather with regard to the measures.

And since this is so, here too one can say, “And likewise for an eruv,” concerning the measures stated in the beraita, and it refers only to the types of foods with which one makes an eruv.

Rather, because

of this Rav Yosef was particular: 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 makes an eruv with two quarter-logs of wine!

And this is a novelty, for it is logical that one quarter-log of wine should suffice, since with this measure wine is considered a “significant thing” everywhere [Ritva].

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

he was speaking concerning this Mishna!

And he teaches us that the eruv is specifically with two quarter-logs of wine, for this corresponds to the significant measure of wine in the giving of the second tithe.

And we conclude: Indeed,

infer from this!

отсюда следует!

The Master said

in the Mishna that we cited above: “All foods combine, and so on,”

and with food for two meals for an eruv!

Rav Yosef thought to say:

The foods do not combine

until there is a meal

one complete

of this

kind

and a meal

complete

of this

kind. But one does not combine two meals from three or four kinds of food, when there is not a complete meal of any one kind.

Rabba said to him

to Rav Yosef:

Even

if there is from each kind

a half, a third, or a quarter

of a meal, they too combine.

In the body of the matter, Rav said: One makes an eruv with two quarter-logs of wine!

And we wonder:

Do we really require all this?!

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

One who gives

wine

for an eruv must have in it a measure

sufficient to eat with it [to soak bread in it]

food for two meals.

And one who gives

vinegar must have in it

a measure

sufficient to dip

food for two meals in it [and it explains this below].

Olives and onions,

there must be in them

enough to eat with them [to accompany bread with them] bread,

food for

two meals.

And since this is so, it is difficult: Why do I need a measure of two quarter-logs of wine, which is the measure of two meals of wine alone? But with wine, is not a measure sufficient to soak bread for two meals enough?!

And we answer:

There,

where we say that with wine we require only enough to soak bread in it, is speaking

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

[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 in it.

And we explain it:

Rav Gidel said in the name of Rav:

Enough to dip in it

food for two meals of vegetables

from which his entire meal consists. [Its measure is a quarter-log. Tosafot and Mishna Berura.]

There are those who say:

This is what

Rav Gidel said in the name of Rav: Enough to dip vegetables eaten during two meals

of bread. That is, his meal consists of bread which he accompanies with vegetables, and the measure of vinegar required for dipping the vegetables is the measure for an eruv.

The Master said:

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says:

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

And we wonder:

And with onions, does one make an eruv?!

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

:

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

that man:

Rabbi! I made

an eruv of boundaries

with onions

in order to go

to Tivein by eye!

And Rabbi Meir seated him within his four cubits,

because Ardiskia was outside the boundary of that man’s city, and he arrived there only because he relied upon his eruv [for Ardiskia was between his eruv and Tivein].

And since anyone who goes outside the boundary has only four cubits, and this man made an eruv with onions, which are ineffective for an eruv, it follows that he went outside his boundary, which was the boundary of the city in which he had spent Shabbat, and he had to sit within his four cubits.

Behold, we see that onions are ineffective for an eruv, and Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar contradicts himself?!

And we answer:

There is no difficulty!

This

which is taught—that onions are ineffective for an eruv—speaks of one who made an eruv

with their leaves,

which are not significant and are poor for eating.

This

which says that one makes an eruv with onions speaks of one who made an eruv

with the bulbs [with the onion itself].

[with the onion itself].

For it is taught: If one ate an onion,

and lay down

and rose in the morning and died, one does not say

and ask:

“From what did he die?”

For it is certain that he died as a result of eating the onion!

And

concerning this

Shmuel said: They taught this only concerning one who eats

the leaves,

but with the bulbs we have no

concern

about it.