What can you do when a non-Jew lives on your courtyard and doesn’t want to contribute to an eruv? Among the solutions suggested are establishing better terms with the non-Jew, including monetarily (rather than getting rid of eruv!). We think this is a lovely solution, and R. Nachman agrees, calling the halakhah an excellent one! Which is unusual – that Chazal assess the halakhot. More: When the Gemara says not to pasken inebriated, R. Nachman says he can’t function well without that same amount of wine! And then Rava takes issue with R. Nachman’s assessing the halakhot… and R. Nachman accepts the rebuke. And to resolve R. Nachman’s preference for wine, the Gemara acknowledges the difference between a little tipsiness and intoxication. That is, the Gemara takes a strong stand against drunkenness, especially in light of R. Nachman’s apparent flippancy. Also: Rabban Gamliel and his student R. Ilai were traveling on the road, and then Rabban Gamliel’s conduct (salvaging loaves of bread, giving it to a non-Jew) suggests prophecy on his part. And we learn 3 lessons from the story. And yet another Rabban Gamliel story teaches *many* lessons… including details that bring us back to the wine. And then the Gemara suggests each detail could have gone differently.
Click here for the Talking Talmud podcast on Eruvin Daf 64.
To listen: Click the link above. Or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Or join the Talking Talmud WhatsApp group, and receive the link as soon as it goes up.
Please like our Facebook page and join our conversation there: Talking Talmud.
