Eruvin 53a (נג.) — the Talmud in English

And

likewise, if there were

bridges and monuments [

a monument—a structure built over a grave ],

that contain a dwelling

for guards who live there,

the measurement is extended opposite them

That is, a line is extended parallel to the city at this distance, as though there were a similar projection on the other side of that direction, and a line is drawn between them.

b.

And they make them,

the city’s boundaries,

like a square tablet, so that one gains

by this

the

distance of walking in the area of

the corners.

For example, in a square city that is two thousand cubits by two thousand cubits, a techum is first assigned to each side, a square of two thousand cubits by two thousand cubits. Between the four squares surrounding the city there are four corners, each two thousand cubits by two thousand cubits. The entire area surrounding the city is squared, and all four corners are included within the large square.

Gemara:

Rav and Shmuel

disagree:

One

of them

taught

in the Mishna: “How

are [the cities] extended.”

And one

of them

taught

“How

are [the cities] made pregnant,”

with an alef.

And we explain:

The one who teaches “made pregnant”

uses the expression

limb by limb,

as though limbs are added to the city. That is, if there is a limb projecting from one side of the city, it is considered as though a limb also projects from the other side, parallel to it, and the city is measured from there.

And the one who teaches “extended”

uses the expression

“like a pregnant woman,”

pregnant, as though the city becomes “pregnant” through the addition of houses, thereby expanding the city.

The Gemara cites additional examples in which Rav and Shmuel disagreed about the meaning of various words.

“The Cave of Machpelah” —

they disagree about it,

Rav and Shmuel:

One said:

There were

two houses, one within the other.

And one said:

There was

a house, with an upper story above it.

And we raised an objection:

Granted, according to the one who says

that it was built as a house with an upper story

one above the other—

this is

why it is called

“Machpelah,”

because it was doubled, with two ceilings.

But according to the one who says: Two houses, one within the other—

what is “Machpelah”?

After all, each house is a house in its own right, and the expression “doubling” is not applicable here.

And we answer: It is called so because

it was doubled in pairs.

Pairs of a man and his wife were buried there, as the Gemara proceeds to explain:

“Mamre, Kiryat Arba

is Hebron.”

Rabbi Yitzḥak said:

Why was it called this? Because it is

the city of the four pairs,

who were buried there:

Adam and Eve; Abraham and Sarah; Isaac and Rebecca; Jacob and Leah .

“And it was in the days of Amraphel”

they disagree about it,

Rav and Shmuel.

One said: Nimrod was his name.

And why was he called Amraphel?

Because

he said [the order] and cast Abraham our forefather into the fiery furnace.

And one said: Amraphel was his name.

And why was he called Nimrod?

Because

he incited the entire world against Him [

an expression of honor with regard to Heaven ]

through his sovereignty .

“And a new king arose over Egypt”

they disagree about it,

Rav and Shmuel.

One said: It was literally a new king.

And one said: His decrees had been renewed.

And we explain:

The one who says: It was literally a new king

brings proof for his words

from the fact that it is written “new.”

And the one who says: His decrees had been renewed

brings proof for his words

from the fact that it does not say

“And the particular king died

and the particular king

reigned,”

which indicates that a literally new king did not arise.

And we raised an objection:

But according to the one who says that his decrees had been renewed,

it is difficult:

Is it not written, “who did not know Joseph”?

This implies that he was literally a new king.

And we answer:

What does “who did not know Joseph” mean?

It means

that he acted

as though he did not know Joseph at all!

(The sign: We learned eighteen and twelve in David and built.)

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: I spent eighteen days studying with Rabbi Oshaya the Great [

a designation for a great man of his generation ],

and I learned only one thing from him in our Mishna,

as we read in it:

“How are the cities made pregnant”—

with an alef.

And we object:

It is not so,

that is, this is not the case.

For

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabbi Oshaya the Great had twelve students, and I spent eighteen days among them, and I learned

to recognize

the heart of each and every one,

how sharp and incisive he was,

and the wisdom of each and every one,

how much he had learned .

Thus he learned much Torah from Rabbi Oshaya, whereas above he said that he learned only one thing from him?

And we answer: Indeed,

the heart of each and every one and the wisdom of each and every one

of his students, he

learned;

but

the Gemara,

the reasoning behind the teachings of the Mishna, he

did not learn,

apart from one thing in our Mishna.

Alternatively,

indeed,

from them,

the students of Rabbi Oshaya, he

learned

much, but

from him,

from Rabbi Oshaya himself, he

did not learn

more than one thing.

Alternatively: Rabbi Yoḥanan was speaking about our Mishna.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said that he learned only one thing from Rabbi Oshaya, but elsewhere in the Talmud he learned many beraitot and teachings from him.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: When we studied Torah with Rabbi Oshaya, we sat four students four

students

to a cubit

of space! We were so crowded together in order to hear from Rabbi Oshaya.

Rabbi said: When we studied Torah with Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua, we sat six students to a cubit !

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabbi Oshaya the Great, in his generation,

was

like Rabbi Meir in his generation—

just as Rabbi Meir’s colleagues in his generation could not fully ascertain his thinking,

because he would declare something impure to be pure and something pure to be impure, providing a valid reason for his words, and his colleagues could not determine when he was stating the correct halakha and when he was stating an incorrect halakha in order to sharpen the students,

so too, Rabbi Oshaya’s colleagues could not fully ascertain his thinking.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The hearts of the earlier ones were like the entrance of the Ulam

of the Temple before the Sanctuary, which was twenty cubits wide.

And

the hearts of

the later ones were like the entrance of the Sanctuary,

which was only ten cubits wide. That is, they were lesser than the earlier ones in wisdom in this proportion.

And

if

we,

our hearts, were

the size of the opening

of a “sewing needle,”

with which torn garments are sewn, whose opening is exceedingly narrow.

And we explain:

The earlier ones

are

Rabbi Akiva.

The later ones

are

Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua.

Some say: The earlier ones—

Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua; the later ones—

Rabbi Oshaya the Great.

And we, [

Rabbi Yoḥanan ]

are like the opening of the hole of a sewing needle.

Abaye said: And we, we are like a peg in a wall,

like a peg inserted into a small hole in a wall, into which it barely fits; so are we

with regard to Gemara.

We understand only a little of what we hear, and even that with difficulty.

Rava said: And we, we are like a finger in wax—

with regard to reasoning.

Like a finger placed into hard wax, into which it cannot enter but merely adheres slightly, so we struggle with reasoning.

Rav Ashi said: We are like a finger in a pit—

with regard to forgetting.

Just as a finger enters the mouth of a pit easily, so we are quick to forget .

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: The people of Judea, who were particular about their language,

speaking in refined language rather than coarse language,

their Torah was preserved in their hands.

But

the people of the Galilee, who were not particular about their language, their Torah was not preserved in their hands.

And we raised an objection:

Is it something

that

depends on being particular

about language

?

Rather,

there is another reason for the matter:

The people of Judea were precise in their wording,

repeating the same wording that they had heard from their teacher,

and they devised mnemonic signs for themselves.

Their precision in their teacher’s wording enabled them to create fine mnemonic devices for the halakhot they had heard orally, so that they would not be forgotten. Therefore,

their Torah was preserved in their hands.

But

the people of the Galilee, who were not precise in their wording and did not devise mnemonic signs for themselves, their Torah was not preserved in their hands.

There is another reason:

The people of Judea—

they learned from one master,

from one rabbi,

their Torah was preserved in their hands .

The people of the Galilee, who did not learn from one master,

but rather heard from each person in different wording, their Torah was not

preserved in their hands.

Because variation in wording confuses and causes forgetfulness, even though the matter itself is the same.

Ravina said: The people of Judea publicized the tractate,

teaching it to others [another interpretation: they explained their teaching and carefully clarified the reason for the matter until it became settled in their hearts]

their Torah was preserved in their hands .

The people of the Galilee, who did not publicize the tractate, their Torah was not preserved in their hands.

David—

he publicized the tractate!

David toiled in Torah and issued rulings for the public, and he consulted his teacher Mefiboshet about every matter, asking whether he had ruled correctly.

Saul—

he did not publicize the tractate.

Therefore,

concerning David, who publicized the tractate, it is written, “Those who fear You—

will see me and rejoice,”

because they rejoiced in his rulings, which were directed according to the truth of Torah.

Concerning Saul, who did not publicize the tractate, it is written, “And in all that he turns”

he acts wickedly,”

because he did not merit ruling according to halakha.