Eruvin 63b (סג:) — the Talmud in English

And it is written

in Chronicles:

Nun—

his son, Joshua his son! [

meaning: Joshua was Nun’s son]. But after Joshua, it does not say “son,” because he died childless.

And it disagrees—

with that which Rav Levi said, that Joshua was punished for issuing a halakhic ruling in the presence of his master—

with Rabbi Abba bar Pappa.

As Rabbi Abba bar Pappa said: Joshua was not punished—

to be childless—

except because he prevented Israel from procreation for one night,

and therefore he was punished measure for measure [Ritva and Ran].

As it is stated: “And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho” [

near Jericho, when he was besieging the city],

“and he lifted his eyes and saw”

and behold, a man stood opposite him, with his sword drawn in his hand. And Joshua went toward him and said to him: “Are you for us, or for our enemies?”

And he said: “No, for I am the captain of the army of the Lord; I have now come!”

And since it is written, “with his sword drawn in his hand,” it follows that he came to bring punishment.

And since he said, “I have now come,” meaning because of a transgression committed now, it follows that there had been another transgression as well.

And necessarily, thus

he said to

Joshua:

“Yesterday,”

meaning, yesterday toward evening,

“you neglected the afternoon tamid offering [

because the priests were occupied carrying the Ark, which went with them to war—Ritva, Megilla 3].

And now,

after nightfall, which is the time for them to study, since they are not occupied with war, which takes place during the day,

“you neglected” [

you are neglecting]

Torah study.

He said

asked

him

Joshua:

“For which of them”

of the transgressions

“have you come?”

He said to him

for the one of

“I have now come,”

namely, for neglecting Torah study.

And proof that he rebuked them for Torah study is that

immediately,

meaning, in the battle of Ai, which followed this battle, Joshua took care not to neglect Torah study.

As it is stated there:

“And Joshua lodged that night in the midst of the people. And it is written”

after it: “And Joshua went that night”

“into the midst of the valley.”

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This teaches that he spent the night delving into the depths of halakha [

the version of the Bach] in the midst of the people.

And now we learn from here that he prevented the people from procreation, for the reason he prevented them from Torah study was that they were lying in ambush for the city at night. Consequently, they did not return the Ark—which they carried with them in battle—to its place.

And it is an established tradition: whenever the Ark and the Divine Presence dwell outside their place—

marital relations are forbidden.

Rabbi Shmuel bar Unya said in the name of Rav: Torah study is greater than the offering of the tamid offerings.

For we see

that he said to him

the angel said to Joshua: concerning

“I have now come,”

and not concerning neglecting the tamid offering.

Thus, Torah study is greater than the offering of the tamid offerings.

Rav Bruna said in the name of Rav: Anyone who sleeps in a chamber [

a room]

in which a man and his wife dwell,

and because of this they are embarrassed by him,

of him the verse says: “You drive away the women of My people from their pleasant houses.”

And Rav Yosef said: This is necessary only even in the case of one’s menstruating wife,

because they are embarrassed by him to speak of intimate matters between him and her [Rabbeinu Yonatan, Maharsha. And see Ritva].

Rava said: If his wife is menstruating—

a blessing will come upon him,

because he protects them from transgression.

And the Gemara rejects Rava’s statement.

It is not so! For until now—

who guarded her [

for until now, who protected her from transgression]? Thus, his act of guarding has accomplished nothing?!

There was a certain alley [

an alleyway]

in which Laḥman dwelled [

and some versions read:

Haman]

bar Risteq [

a gentile whose name was this].

They said to him

the Jews who lived with him in the alley:

“Rent us your domain!”

They asked him to rent them his domain, so that he would not prohibit them on Shabbat!

He did not rent it to them.

He did not wish to rent it to them.

They came,

they came,

they said to him,

and related this

to Abaye.

He said to them

Abaye:

“Go,”

go, and

“renounce your rights”

to one of the residents of the alley, and

he will be a single resident alongside a gentile.

And a single resident alongside a gentile—

does not prohibit,

in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov at the beginning of our chapter, who requires two Jews.

However, their renunciation of rights helped them only to carry articles from the house of the one to whom they had renounced their rights into the alley, and likewise to carry in the alley articles that had spent Shabbat within the alley [which is forbidden without alleyway partnership].

They said

they wondered

to him

to Abaye:

“Is that the reason”

the reason that a single resident alongside a gentile is permitted is not

“except”

because

“Jews do not commonly dwell”

one Jew with a gentile, since the individual fears for his life because of the gentile.

And

if

“here,”

where they are many,

“they do dwell commonly,”

it is common for Jews to dwell there; how, then, will renouncing their rights help them?!

He said to them

Abaye: Even now it is not common. For

“all of them renouncing their rights to one”—

“is an uncommon matter.”

And

the Sages did not issue a decree concerning an uncommon matter.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, went and repeated the teaching

of Abaye—that renouncing their rights to one person is sufficient—

before Rava.

He said to him

Rava: