Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Daf Yomi

August 27, 2020 | 讝壮 讘讗诇讜诇 转砖状驻

Masechet Eruvin is sponsored by Adina and Eric Hagege in honor of our parents, Rabbi Dov and Elayne Greenstone and Roger and Ketty Hagege who raised children, grandchildren and great grandchildren committed to Torah learning.

Eruvin 18

How far/close can one distance the beams for the well from the well? Is there a difference between a well (from a spring) and a cistern (rain water)? Does it make a difference if it belongs to an individual or if it is communal? What is the approach of Chanania, Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava and is it clear that our mishna doesn’t hold like each of them? What is the etymology of the word diomed? The gemara then brings a few other words relating to the root “dio”, meaning two. In this conext the gemara brings eight statements of Rabbi Yirmia ben Elazar (one will be in the next daf). 1. Man was created as two images of man and woman and then split. The gemara then brings a debate regarding this issue (was woman created from an appendage/tail of man) and analyzes/questions the different approaches. The gemara is grappling with the differences of the description of the creation of woman from Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 in Genesis. 2. When Adam was excommunicated after he sinned, he gave birth to evil spirits. 3. Don’t say all the praise of a person to his/her face. 4. Better to be fed bitter food by the hand of God than to have sweet food given to you by other people (be dependent on others for food). 5. If those in the house learn Torah at night, the house will not be destroyed. 6. Once the Temple was destroyed, the full name of God was no longer used – only the two letters that spell “yah“. 7. When Babylonia was destroyed, it affected the neighbors negatively but when the capital of the Israelite kingdom was destroyed it affect the neighboring area positively.

诇讛专讞讬拽 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讜讘诇讘讚 砖讬专讘讛 讘驻住讬谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 注讚 讘讬转 住讗转讬诐


to distance the boards from the well and expand the enclosed area by any amount, i.e., as much as one wishes, provided that he increases the number of upright boards between the double posts. Rabbi Yehuda says: The partitioned area may be expanded up to an area of two beit se鈥檃, which is an area of five thousand square cubits.


讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讘讬转 住讗转讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讙谞讛 讜诇拽专驻祝 讗讘诇 讗诐 讛讬讛 讚讬专 讗讜 住讛专 讗讜 诪讜拽爪讛 讗讜 讞爪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬转 讞诪砖转 讻讜专讬谉 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬转 注砖专讛 讻讜专讬谉 诪讜转专 讜诪讜转专 诇讛专讞讬拽 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讜讘诇讘讚 砖讬专讘讛 讘驻住讬谉:


The Rabbis said to him: They only spoke of an area of two beit se鈥檃 with regard to a garden or an enclosure used for storing wood, scrap, and the like [karpef]. But if it was a pen [dir], or a stable [sahar], or a backyard, or a courtyard in front of the house, even if it had an area of five beit kor or even ten beit kor, it is permitted. And it is permitted to distance the boards and expand the enclosed area by any amount, provided that one increases the upright boards between the double posts.


讙诪壮 诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻讞谞谞讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 注讜砖讬谉 驻住讬谉 诇讘讜专 讜讞讘诇讬谉 诇砖讬讬专讗 讜讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 讞讘诇讬谉 诇讘讜专 讗讘诇 诇讗 驻住讬谉


GEMARA: The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya, as it was taught in a baraita: One may arrange upright boards around a water cistern and ropes around a caravan. 岣nanya disagrees and says: One may set up ropes for a cistern, but not upright boards.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讞谞谞讬讗 讘讜专 诇讞讜讚 讘讗专 诇讞讜讚


The Gemara rejects this suggestion: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya, a cistern of collected rain water has a discrete law, as the water will eventually be consumed and the upright boards will become unnecessary; and a well of spring water has a discrete law, as the water is constantly renewed and the upright boards will remain useful.


讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 诪讚诇讗 拽转谞讬 讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 注讜砖讬谉 讞讘诇讬谉 诇讘讜专 讜驻住讬谉 诇讘讗专 诪讻诇诇 讚诇讞谞谞讬讗 诇讗 砖谞讗 讘讜专 讜诇讗 砖谞讗 讘讗专 讞讘诇讬谉 讗讬谉 驻住讬谉 诇讗 诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻讞谞谞讬讗


Some say a different version of the previous passage: From the fact that the baraita does not teach: 岣nanya says: One may set up ropes around a water cistern and boards around a well, by inference, according to the opinion of 岣nanya, there is no difference between a cistern and a well. In both cases, ropes are indeed permitted, whereas upright boards are not. Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讞谞谞讬讗 诇诪讗讬 讚拽讗诪专 转谞讗 拽诪讗 拽讗 诪讛讚专 诇讬讛


The Gemara rejects this argument: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya, he was only replying to that which the first tanna had said; since the first tanna had spoken only of a cistern, there was no need for 岣nanya to fully clarify his own position and distinguish between a cistern and a well.


诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讚转谞谉 讗讞讚 讘讗专 讛专讘讬诐 讜讘讜专 讛专讘讬诐 讜讘讗专 讛讬讞讬讚 注讜砖讬谉 诇讛谉 驻住讬谉 讗讘诇 讘讜专 讛讬讞讬讚 注讜砖讬谉 诇讜 诪讞讬爪讛 讙讘讜讛 注砖专讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗


The Gemara further suggests: Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. As we learned in a mishna: In each of the cases of a public well, a public cistern, and a private well, one may arrange upright boards for them, but in the case of a private cistern, one must establish a proper partition for it ten handbreadths high; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva.


讜讗讬诇讜 讛讻讗 拽转谞讬 诇讘讬专讗讜转 诇讘讬专讗讜转 讗讬谉 诇讘讜专讜转 诇讗


Whereas here in the mishna it teaches: One may arrange upright boards for a well, from which one may infer that for a well, yes, it is permitted to use posts, but for a cistern, no, it is not permitted. This is opposed to Rabbi Akiva鈥檚 opinion, which maintains that posts may be arranged for a public cistern.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讘讗专 诪讬诐 讞讬讬诐 讚驻住讬拽讗 诇讬讛 诇讗 砖谞讗 讚专讘讬诐 讜诇讗 砖谞讗 讚讬讞讬讚 拽转谞讬 讘讜专 诪讻讜谞住讬谉 讚诇讗 驻住讬拽讗 诇讬讛 诇讗 拽转谞讬


The Gemara rejects this argument as well: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, the tanna of the mishna teaches the case of a well of spring water, which he can teach in a distinct manner because there is no difference whether it belongs to the public and there is no difference whether it belongs to an individual, as it is always permitted. However, he did not teach the case of a cistern containing collected rain water, which he could not teach in a distinct manner because there is a difference between a public cistern and a private one. However, it cannot be proven from here that he disagrees with Rabbi Akiva.


诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘讘讗 讚转谞谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘讘讗 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 驻住讬谉 讗诇讗 诇讘讗专 讛专讘讬诐 讘诇讘讚 讜讗讬诇讜 讛讻讗 拽转谞讬 诇讘讬专讗讜转 诇讗 砖谞讗 讚专讘讬诐 讜诇讗 砖谞讗 讚讬讞讬讚


The Gemara further suggests: Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, as we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava says: One may only arrange upright boards for a public well, whereas here the mishna states: For wells. The plural term implies that there is no difference if the well belongs to the public, and there is no difference if the well belongs to an individual.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘讘讗 诪讗讬 讘讬专讗讜转 讘讬专讗讜转 讚注诇诪讗


The Gemara also rejects this line of reasoning: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, to what is the mishna referring when it says wells? It is referring to wells in general, but the tanna means to include only public wells.


诪讗讬 讚讬讜诪讚讬谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讚讬讜 注诪讜讚讬谉:


The mishna had mentioned double posts [deyomadin]: The Gemara asks: What are deyomadin? Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: Two [deyo] posts [amudin], which are put together to create a single corner piece.


讚讬讜 诇诪谞讜讚讛 砖讘讞 讝讜谞讬转 谞转拽诇拽诇 讘诪讬讚讛 砖诇砖讛 住讬诪谉:


Having cited Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar鈥檚 statement with reference to the prefix deyo, the Gemara cites other statements of his. Two, to one who was ostracized, praise, nourishment, ruin, attribute, three, are mnemonics for the following statements by Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar.


转谞谉 讛转诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛砖讬转讬谉 驻讟讜专讬谉 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛讚讬讜驻专讗 诪讗讬 讚讬讜驻专讗 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讗讬诇谉 讛注讜砖讛 讚讬讜 驻讬专讜转 讘砖谞讛


We learned there in a mishna: Rabbi Yehuda says: All inferior figs are exempt from being tithed, even if they are of doubtfully tithed produce [demai], as even if the seller is an am ha鈥檃retz, he must certainly have already separated tithes from them, since the loss incurred by tithing is negligible, except for deyufra. The Gemara asks: What is deyufra? Ulla said: A tree that yields two [deyo] harvests of fruit [peirot] each year.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讚讬讜 驻专爪讜祝 驻谞讬诐 讛讬讛 诇讜 诇讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 砖谞讗诪专 讗讞讜专 讜拽讚诐 爪专转谞讬 讻转讬讘 讜讬讘谉 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 讗转 讛爪诇注 讜讙讜壮 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讞讚 讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讝谞讘


Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Adam was first created with two [deyo] faces, one male and the other female. As it is stated: 鈥淵ou have formed me behind and before, and laid Your hand upon me鈥 (Psalms 139:5). Similarly, it is written: 鈥淎nd the tzela, which the Lord, God, had taken from the man, He made a woman, and brought her unto the man鈥 (Genesis 2:22). Rav and Shmuel disagree over the meaning of the word tzela: One said: It means a female face, from which God created Eve; and one said: Adam was created with a tail [zanav], which God removed from him and from which He created Eve.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讗讞讜专 讜拽讚诐 爪专转谞讬 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讗讞讜专 讜拽讚诐 爪专转谞讬


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that tzela means face; it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淵ou have formed me [tzartani] behind and before.鈥 However, according to the one who says that tzela means tail, what is meant by the verse: 鈥淵ou have formed me [tzartani] behind and before鈥?


讻讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗讞讜专 诇诪注砖讛 讘专讗砖讬转 讜拽讚诐 诇驻讜专注谞讜转


The Gemara answers that this verse is to be understood as bearing a moral message, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ami, as Rabbi Ami said: Behind means Adam was created at the end of the act of creation; and before means that he was first for punishment.


讘砖诇诪讗 讗讞讜专 诇诪注砖讛 讘专讗砖讬转 讚诇讗 讗讬讘专讬 注讚 诪注诇讬 砖讘转讗 讗诇讗 讜拽讚诐 诇驻讜专注谞讜转 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诪砖讜诐 拽诇诇讛 讛讗 讘转讞讬诇讛 谞转拽诇诇 谞讞砖 讜诇讘住讜祝 谞转拽诇诇讛 讞讜讛 讜诇讘住讜祝 谞转拽诇诇 讗讚诐


The Gemara asks: Granted, it is understandable that Adam was behind, or last, in the act of creation, meaning that he was not created until the sixth day, Shabbat eve. However, before, or first, for punishment, what does this mean? If you say that he was punished first because of the curse pronounced in the wake of the sin involving the Tree of Knowledge, there is a difficulty. Wasn鈥檛 the snake was cursed first, and afterward Eve was cursed, and only at the end was Adam cursed?


讗诇讗 诇诪讘讜诇 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬诪讞 讗转 讻诇 讛讬拽讜诐 讗砖专 注诇 驻谞讬 讛讗讚诪讛 诪讗讚诐 讜注讚 讘讛诪讛 讜讙讜壮


Rather, this refers to the punishment of the Flood, as it is written: 鈥淎nd He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle, creeping things and fowl of the heaven鈥 (Genesis 7:23). This indicates that the punishment began with man.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讬爪专 转专讬谉 讬讜讚讬谉 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讜讬讬爪专


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was originally a face or side of Adam; it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淭hen the Lord God formed [vayyitzer] man鈥 (Genesis 2:7). Vayyitzer is written with a double yod, one for Adam and one for Eve. However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is conveyed by spelling vayyitzer with a double yod?


讻讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 驻讝讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 驻讝讬 讗讜讬 诇讬 诪讬爪专讬 讗讜讬 诇讬 诪讬讜爪专讬


The Gemara responds: This is interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, as Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said: This comes to emphasize that which one says to himself in every circumstance: Woe unto me from my evil inclination [yetzer] if I perform the will of my Maker, and woe to me from my Maker [Yotzri] if I perform the will of my inclination.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讝讻专 讜谞拽讘讛 讘专讗诐 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讝讻专 讜谞拽讘讛 讘专讗诐


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淢ale and female, He created them, and blessed them, and called their name Man in the day when they were created鈥 (Genesis 5:2), which indicates that from the very beginning of their creation, He fashioned two faces, one for the male and the other for the female. However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is the meaning of the verse: 鈥淢ale and female, He created them鈥?


诇讻讚专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讚专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 专诪讬 讻转讬讘 讝讻专 讜谞拽讘讛 讘专讗诐 讜讻转讬讘 (讻讬) 讘爪诇诐 讗诇讛讬诐 讘专讗 讗讜转讜 讘转讞诇讛 注诇转讛 讘诪讞砖讘讛 诇讘专讗讜转 砖谞讬诐 讜诇讘住讜祝 诇讗 谞讘专讗 讗诇讗 讗讞讚


The Gemara answers: It can be explained in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, as Rabbi Abbahu raised a contradiction between the verses: On the one hand it is written: 鈥淢ale and female, He created them,鈥 in the plural, and on the other hand it is written: 鈥淪o God created man in His own image, for in the image of God He created him鈥 (Genesis 1:27), in the singular. At first, the thought entered God鈥檚 mind to create two, and ultimately, only one was actually created.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬住讙讜专 讘砖专 转讞转谞讛 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讜讬住讙讜专 讘砖专 转讞转谞讛


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淎nd He took one of his sides and closed up the flesh in its place鈥 (Genesis 2:21). However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is meant by the verse: 鈥淎nd He closed up the flesh in its place鈥?


讗诪专 专讘 讝讘讬讚 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诇讗 谞爪专讻讛 讗诇讗 诇诪拽讜诐 讞转讱


Rav Zevid said, and some say it was Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say it was Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k: It was necessary to say that the fleshed closed up only with regard to the place of the incision.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讘谉 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 诪讗讬 讜讬讘谉


The Gemara challenges the other opinion: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail; it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淎nd the Lord God built the tzela鈥 (Genesis 2:22), as it was a completely new building. However, according to the one who said that Eve was a complete face or side, what is the meaning of: 鈥淎nd He built鈥? What needed to be built?


诇讻讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诪谞住讬讗 讚讚专讬砖 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诪谞住讬讗 讜讬讘谉 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 讗转 讛爪诇注 诪诇诪讚 砖拽讬诇注讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇讞讜讛 讜讛讘讬讗讛 诇讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 砖讻谉 讘讻专讻讬 讛讬诐 拽讜专讬谉 诇拽诇注讬转讗 讘谞讬讬转讗


The Gemara responds: This must be interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya, as Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya interpreted homiletically the verse: 鈥淎nd the Lord God built the tzela.鈥 This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, braided for Eve her hair, and then brought her to Adam, as in the coastal towns, they call braiding hair building.


讚讘专 讗讞专 讜讬讘谉 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 诪诇诪讚 砖讘谞讗讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇讞讜讛 讻讘谞讬讬谉


Alternatively, the verse: 鈥淎nd the Lord God built,鈥 can be understood as a description of Eve鈥檚 basic shape, as Rav 岣sda said, and some say it is taught in a baraita: This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, built Eve like the structure


讗讜爪专 诪讛 讗讜爪专 讝讛 专讞讘 诪诇诪讟讛 讜拽爪专 诪诇诪注诇讛 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗转 讛驻讬专讜转 讗祝 讛讗砖讛 专讞讘讛 诪诇诪讟讛 讜拽爪专讛 诪诇诪注诇讛 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗转 讛讜诇讚


of a storehouse. Just as a storehouse is built wide on the bottom and narrow on top, in order to hold produce without collapsing, so too a woman is created wide on the bottom and narrow on top, in order to hold the fetus.


讜讬讘讬讗讛 讗诇 讛讗讚诐 诪诇诪讚 砖注砖讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 砖讜砖讘讬谞讜转 诇讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 诪讻讗谉 诇讙讚讜诇 砖讬注砖讛 砖讜砖讘讬谞讜转 诇拽讟谉 讜讗诇 讬专注 诇讜


The Gemara cites an exposition of the end of the previously cited verse: 鈥淎nd brought her unto the man鈥 (Genesis 2:22). This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, was Adam the first man鈥檚 best man, attending to all his wedding needs and bringing his wife to him. From here we learn that a greater individual should serve as a best man for a lesser individual and should not feel bad about it as something beneath his dignity.


讜诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 住讙讬 讘专讬砖讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诪住转讘专讗 讚讝讻专 住讙讬 讘专讬砖讗 讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬讛诇讱 讗讚诐 讗讞讜专讬 讗砖讛 讘讚专讱 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讬讗 讗砖转讜 谞讝讚诪谞讛 注诇 讛讙砖专 讬住诇拽谞讛 诇爪讚讚讬谉 讜讻诇 讛注讜讘专 讗讞讜专讬 讗砖讛 讘谞讛专 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞诇拽 诇注讜诇诐 讛讘讗:


The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that Eve was a face or side of Adam, which one of them walked in front? Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said: It is reasonable to say that the male walked in front, as this is proper behavior, as it was taught in a baraita: A man should not walk behind a woman on a path, even if she is his wife. If she happens upon him on a bridge, he should walk quickly in order to catch up to her and consequently move her to his side, so that she will not walk before him. And anyone who walks behind a woman in a river, where she has to lift up her skirt in order to cross, has no share in the World-to-Come.


转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪专爪讛 诪注讜转 诇讗砖讛 诪讬讚讜 诇讬讚讛 讗讜 诪讬讚讛 诇讬讚讜 讘砖讘讬诇 砖讬住转讻诇 讘讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讚讜诪讛 诇诪砖讛 专讘讬谞讜 砖拽讬讘诇 转讜专讛 诪讛专 住讬谞讬 诇讗 讬谞拽讛 诪讚讬谞讛 砖诇 讙讬讛谞诐 讜注诇讬讜 讛讻转讜讘 讗讜诪专 讬讚 诇讬讚 诇讗 讬谞拽讛 专注 诇讗 讬谞拽讛 诪讚讬谞讛 砖诇 讙讬讛谞诐


The Sages taught: With regard to one who counts out money for a woman from his hand into her hand or from her hand into his hand, in order to look upon her, even if in other matters he is like Moses our teacher, who received the Torah from Mount Sinai, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna. The verse says about him: 鈥淗and to hand, the evil man shall not go unpunished鈥 (Proverbs 11:21). One who hands money from his hand to her hand, even if he received the Torah from God鈥檚 hand to his own, like Moses, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna, which is called evil.


讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪谞讜讞 注诐 讛讗专抓 讛讬讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽诐 讜讬诇讱 诪谞讜讞 讗讞专讬 讗砖转讜


Rav Na岣an said: From the following verse, it is known that Samson鈥檚 father, Manoah, was an ignoramus, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Manoah arose, and went after his wife鈥 (Judges 13:11), which shows that he was unfamiliar with the principle that one must not walk behind a woman.


诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讙讘讬 讗诇拽谞讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬诇讱 讗诇拽谞讛 讗讞专讬 讗砖转讜 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讜讙讘讬 讗诇讬砖注 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽诐 讜讬诇讱 讗讞专讬讛 讛讻讬 谞诪讬


Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k strongly objects to this: If that is so, if the verse relating to Manoah is understood literally, what will one say about the verse with regard to Elkana, the father of the prophet Samuel, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Elkana walked after his wife.鈥 Does this verse mean that Elkana was also an ignorant person? And what of the verse with regard to the prophet Elisha, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the mother of the child said: As the Lord lives, and as your soul lives, I will not leave you; and he arose and followed her鈥 (ii Kings 4:30). Does this verse mean that Elisha was also an uneducated person?


讗诇讗 讗讞专讬 讚讘专讬讛 讜注爪转讛 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 讗讞专讬 讚讘专讬讛 讜注爪转讛


Rather, certainly each of these verses means that he followed her words and advice. If so, here too, the verse concerning Manoah may be similarly interpreted. He did not literally walk behind his wife, but rather he followed her words and advice.


讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讜诇诪讗讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪谞讜讞 注诐 讛讗专抓 讛讬讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬 专讘 谞诪讬 诇讗 拽专讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜转拽诐 专讘拽讛 讜谞注专讜转讬讛 讜转专讻讘谞讛 注诇 讛讙诪诇讬诐 讜转诇讻谞讛 讗讞专讬 讛讗讬砖 讜诇讗 诇驻谞讬 讛讗讬砖


Rav Ashi said: And according to what Rav Na岣an said, that Manoah was an ignoramus, he did not even read the basic Torah stories that children learn in school. As it is written: 鈥淩ebecca arose, and her damsels, and they rode upon the camels, and followed the man鈥 (Genesis 24:61); they followed him and did not walk before the man.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗讞专讬 讗专讬 讜诇讗 讗讞专讬 讗砖讛 讗讞专讬 讗砖讛 讜诇讗 讗讞专讬 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 讗讞讜专讬 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 讜诇讗 讗讞讜专讬 讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讘砖注讛 砖诪转驻诇诇讬谉


On this topic, Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It is preferable to walk behind a lion, and not behind a woman. And it is preferable to walk behind a woman and not behind idolatry. When a procession honoring idolatry is passing in the street, it is better to walk behind a woman than appear to be accompanying the idolatry. It is preferable to walk behind idolatry and not behind a synagogue at a time of prayer. By walking behind a synagogue at a time of prayer and not entering, one appears as though he were denying the God to Whom the congregation is directing its prayers.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻诇 讗讜转谉 讛砖谞讬诐 砖讛讬讛 讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 讘谞讬讚讜讬 讛讜诇讬讚 专讜讞讬谉 讜砖讬讚讬谉 讜诇讬诇讬谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讞讬 讗讚诐 砖诇砖讬诐 讜诪讗转 砖谞讛 讜讬讜诇讚 讘讚诪讜转讜 讻爪诇诪讜 诪讻诇诇 讚注讚 讛讗讬讚谞讗 诇讗讜 讻爪诇诪讜 讗讜诇讬讚


Having cited an aggadic statement of Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar, the Gemara cites other statements of his: Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: All those years during which Adam was ostracized for the sin involving the Tree of Knowledge, he bore spirits, demons, and female demons, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth鈥 (Genesis 5:3). By inference, until now, the age of one hundred thirty, he did not bear after his image, but rather bore other creatures.


诪讬转讬讘讬 讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 讞住讬讚 讙讚讜诇 讛讬讛 讻讬讜谉 砖专讗讛 砖谞拽谞住讛 诪讬转讛 注诇 讬讚讜 讬砖讘 讘转注谞讬转 诪讗讛 砖诇砖讬诐 砖谞讛 讜驻讬专砖 诪谉 讛讗砖讛 诪讗讛 砖诇砖讬诐 砖谞讛 讜讛注诇讛 讝专讝讬 转讗谞讬诐 注诇 讘砖专讜 诪讗讛 砖诇砖讬诐 砖谞讛


The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: Adam the first man was very pious. When he saw that death was imposed as a punishment because of him, he observed a fast for a hundred thirty years, and he separated from his wife for a hundred thirty years, and wore belts [zarzei] of fig leaves on his body as his only garment for a hundred thirty years. If so, how did he father demons into the world?


讻讬 拽讗诪专讬谞谉 讛讛讜讗 讘砖讻讘转 讝专注 讚讞讝讗 诇讗讜谞住讬讛


The Gemara answers: When Rabbi Yirmeya made his statement, he meant that those destructive creatures were formed from the semen that Adam accidentally emitted, which brought the destructive creatures into being.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪拽爪转 砖讘讞讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讘驻谞讬讜 讜讻讜诇讜 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 诪拽爪转 砖讘讞讜 讘驻谞讬讜 讚讻转讬讘 讻讬 讗讜转讱 专讗讬转讬 爪讚讬拽 诇驻谞讬 讘讚讜专 讛讝讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar further said: Only some of a person鈥檚 praise should be said in his presence, and all of it may be said not in his presence. Only some of his praise should be said in his presence, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Noah, come, you and all your house into the ark, for you have I seen righteous before Me in this generation鈥 (Genesis 7:1).


讻讜诇讜 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讚讻转讬讘 谞讞 讗讬砖 爪讚讬拽 转诪讬诐 讛讬讛 讘讚讜专讜转讬讜


And all of it may be said not in his presence, as it is written: 鈥淭hese are the generations of Noah; Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God鈥 (Genesis 6:9). When not referring to him in his presence, God refers to Noah as a righteous and perfect man.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讛谞讛 注诇讛 讝讬转 讟专祝 讘驻讬讛 讗诪专讛 讬讜谞讛 诇驻谞讬 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 专讘讜谞讜 砖诇 注讜诇诐 讬讛讬讜 诪讝讜谞讜转讬 诪专讜专讬谉 讻讝讬转 讜诪住讜专讬谉 讘讬讚讱 讜讗诇 讬讛讬讜 诪转讜拽讬谉 讻讚讘砖 讜转诇讜讬谉 讘讬讚 讘砖专 讜讚诐 讻转讬讘 讛讻讗 讟专祝 讜讻转讬讘 讛转诐 讛讟专讬驻谞讬 诇讞诐 讞讜拽讬


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淎nd the dove came in to him in the evening, and lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf, plucked off [taraf]; so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth鈥 (Genesis 8:11)? The dove said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, let my food be bitter as an olive but given into Your hand, and let it not be sweet as honey but dependent upon flesh and blood. He adds this explanation: Here it is written: Taraf. And there it is written: 鈥淩emove far from me falsehood and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me [hatrifeni] my allotted portion鈥 (Proverbs 30:8).


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻诇 讘讬转 砖谞砖诪注讬谉 讘讜 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讘诇讬诇讛 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讜 谞讞专讘 砖谞讗诪专 讜诇讗 讗诪专 讗讬讛 讗诇讜讛 注讜砖讬 谞讜转谉 讝诪讬专讜转 讘诇讬诇讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Any house in which the words of Torah are heard at night will never be destroyed, as it is stated: 鈥淏ut none says: Where is God my Maker, Who gives songs in the night鈥 (Job 35:10). The verse implies that one who sings songs of Torah in his house at night will not need to lament the destruction of his home.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪讬讜诐 砖讞专讘 讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讚讬讜 诇注讜诇诐 砖讬砖转诪砖 讘砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 砖谞讗诪专 讻诇 讛谞砖诪讛 转讛诇诇 讬讛 讛诇诇讜讬讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar further said: From the day that the Temple was destroyed, it is enough for the world to use in its praise of God, or in greeting one another with the name of God, only two letters of the Tetragrammaton, namely yod and heh, as it is stated: 鈥淟et everything that has breath praise the Lord [Yah]. Halleluya (Psalms 150:6), without mentioning the full name of God, comprised of four letters.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 谞转拽诇诇讛 讘讘诇 谞转拽诇诇讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 谞转拽诇诇讛 砖讜诪专讜谉 谞转讘专讻讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 谞转拽诇诇讛 讘讘诇 谞转拽诇诇讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜砖诪转讬讛 诇诪讜专砖 拽讬驻讜讚 讜讗讙诪讬 诪讬诐 谞转拽诇诇讛 砖讜诪专讜谉 谞转讘专讻讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜砖诪转讬 砖讜诪专讜谉 诇注讬 讛砖讚讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: When Babylonia was cursed, its neighbors were cursed along with it. When Samaria was cursed, its neighbors were blessed. He explains: When Babylonia was cursed, its neighbors were cursed, as it is written: 鈥淚 will also make it a possession for wild birds, and pools of water鈥 (Isaiah 14:23), and the arrival of predatory animals brings harm to the surrounding neighbors as well. When Samaria was cursed, its neighbors were blessed, as it is written: 鈥淭herefore I will turn Samaria into a heap of rubble in the field


Masechet Eruvin is sponsored by Adina and Eric Hagege in honor of our parents, Rabbi Dov and Elayne Greenstone and Roger and Ketty Hagege who raised children, grandchildren and great grandchildren committed to Torah learning.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time: Eruvin 17-23

We will review key concepts in Daf 17-23 including the maximum area for a campsite, the mechanism by which we...
talking talmud_square

Eruvin 18: If She Walks in Front of You, You May Not Follow

A small portion of a long mishnah: the case of arranging boards as an enclosure around a well, where 4...

Eruvin 18

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Eruvin 18

诇讛专讞讬拽 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讜讘诇讘讚 砖讬专讘讛 讘驻住讬谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 注讚 讘讬转 住讗转讬诐


to distance the boards from the well and expand the enclosed area by any amount, i.e., as much as one wishes, provided that he increases the number of upright boards between the double posts. Rabbi Yehuda says: The partitioned area may be expanded up to an area of two beit se鈥檃, which is an area of five thousand square cubits.


讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讘讬转 住讗转讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讙谞讛 讜诇拽专驻祝 讗讘诇 讗诐 讛讬讛 讚讬专 讗讜 住讛专 讗讜 诪讜拽爪讛 讗讜 讞爪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬转 讞诪砖转 讻讜专讬谉 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬转 注砖专讛 讻讜专讬谉 诪讜转专 讜诪讜转专 诇讛专讞讬拽 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讜讘诇讘讚 砖讬专讘讛 讘驻住讬谉:


The Rabbis said to him: They only spoke of an area of two beit se鈥檃 with regard to a garden or an enclosure used for storing wood, scrap, and the like [karpef]. But if it was a pen [dir], or a stable [sahar], or a backyard, or a courtyard in front of the house, even if it had an area of five beit kor or even ten beit kor, it is permitted. And it is permitted to distance the boards and expand the enclosed area by any amount, provided that one increases the upright boards between the double posts.


讙诪壮 诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻讞谞谞讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 注讜砖讬谉 驻住讬谉 诇讘讜专 讜讞讘诇讬谉 诇砖讬讬专讗 讜讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 讞讘诇讬谉 诇讘讜专 讗讘诇 诇讗 驻住讬谉


GEMARA: The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya, as it was taught in a baraita: One may arrange upright boards around a water cistern and ropes around a caravan. 岣nanya disagrees and says: One may set up ropes for a cistern, but not upright boards.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讞谞谞讬讗 讘讜专 诇讞讜讚 讘讗专 诇讞讜讚


The Gemara rejects this suggestion: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya, a cistern of collected rain water has a discrete law, as the water will eventually be consumed and the upright boards will become unnecessary; and a well of spring water has a discrete law, as the water is constantly renewed and the upright boards will remain useful.


讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 诪讚诇讗 拽转谞讬 讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 注讜砖讬谉 讞讘诇讬谉 诇讘讜专 讜驻住讬谉 诇讘讗专 诪讻诇诇 讚诇讞谞谞讬讗 诇讗 砖谞讗 讘讜专 讜诇讗 砖谞讗 讘讗专 讞讘诇讬谉 讗讬谉 驻住讬谉 诇讗 诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻讞谞谞讬讗


Some say a different version of the previous passage: From the fact that the baraita does not teach: 岣nanya says: One may set up ropes around a water cistern and boards around a well, by inference, according to the opinion of 岣nanya, there is no difference between a cistern and a well. In both cases, ropes are indeed permitted, whereas upright boards are not. Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讞谞谞讬讗 诇诪讗讬 讚拽讗诪专 转谞讗 拽诪讗 拽讗 诪讛讚专 诇讬讛


The Gemara rejects this argument: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of 岣nanya, he was only replying to that which the first tanna had said; since the first tanna had spoken only of a cistern, there was no need for 岣nanya to fully clarify his own position and distinguish between a cistern and a well.


诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讚转谞谉 讗讞讚 讘讗专 讛专讘讬诐 讜讘讜专 讛专讘讬诐 讜讘讗专 讛讬讞讬讚 注讜砖讬谉 诇讛谉 驻住讬谉 讗讘诇 讘讜专 讛讬讞讬讚 注讜砖讬谉 诇讜 诪讞讬爪讛 讙讘讜讛 注砖专讛 讟驻讞讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗


The Gemara further suggests: Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. As we learned in a mishna: In each of the cases of a public well, a public cistern, and a private well, one may arrange upright boards for them, but in the case of a private cistern, one must establish a proper partition for it ten handbreadths high; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva.


讜讗讬诇讜 讛讻讗 拽转谞讬 诇讘讬专讗讜转 诇讘讬专讗讜转 讗讬谉 诇讘讜专讜转 诇讗


Whereas here in the mishna it teaches: One may arrange upright boards for a well, from which one may infer that for a well, yes, it is permitted to use posts, but for a cistern, no, it is not permitted. This is opposed to Rabbi Akiva鈥檚 opinion, which maintains that posts may be arranged for a public cistern.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讘讗专 诪讬诐 讞讬讬诐 讚驻住讬拽讗 诇讬讛 诇讗 砖谞讗 讚专讘讬诐 讜诇讗 砖谞讗 讚讬讞讬讚 拽转谞讬 讘讜专 诪讻讜谞住讬谉 讚诇讗 驻住讬拽讗 诇讬讛 诇讗 拽转谞讬


The Gemara rejects this argument as well: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, the tanna of the mishna teaches the case of a well of spring water, which he can teach in a distinct manner because there is no difference whether it belongs to the public and there is no difference whether it belongs to an individual, as it is always permitted. However, he did not teach the case of a cistern containing collected rain water, which he could not teach in a distinct manner because there is a difference between a public cistern and a private one. However, it cannot be proven from here that he disagrees with Rabbi Akiva.


诇讬诪讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘讘讗 讚转谞谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘讘讗 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 驻住讬谉 讗诇讗 诇讘讗专 讛专讘讬诐 讘诇讘讚 讜讗讬诇讜 讛讻讗 拽转谞讬 诇讘讬专讗讜转 诇讗 砖谞讗 讚专讘讬诐 讜诇讗 砖谞讗 讚讬讞讬讚


The Gemara further suggests: Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, as we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava says: One may only arrange upright boards for a public well, whereas here the mishna states: For wells. The plural term implies that there is no difference if the well belongs to the public, and there is no difference if the well belongs to an individual.


讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘讘讗 诪讗讬 讘讬专讗讜转 讘讬专讗讜转 讚注诇诪讗


The Gemara also rejects this line of reasoning: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, to what is the mishna referring when it says wells? It is referring to wells in general, but the tanna means to include only public wells.


诪讗讬 讚讬讜诪讚讬谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讚讬讜 注诪讜讚讬谉:


The mishna had mentioned double posts [deyomadin]: The Gemara asks: What are deyomadin? Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: Two [deyo] posts [amudin], which are put together to create a single corner piece.


讚讬讜 诇诪谞讜讚讛 砖讘讞 讝讜谞讬转 谞转拽诇拽诇 讘诪讬讚讛 砖诇砖讛 住讬诪谉:


Having cited Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar鈥檚 statement with reference to the prefix deyo, the Gemara cites other statements of his. Two, to one who was ostracized, praise, nourishment, ruin, attribute, three, are mnemonics for the following statements by Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar.


转谞谉 讛转诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛砖讬转讬谉 驻讟讜专讬谉 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛讚讬讜驻专讗 诪讗讬 讚讬讜驻专讗 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讗讬诇谉 讛注讜砖讛 讚讬讜 驻讬专讜转 讘砖谞讛


We learned there in a mishna: Rabbi Yehuda says: All inferior figs are exempt from being tithed, even if they are of doubtfully tithed produce [demai], as even if the seller is an am ha鈥檃retz, he must certainly have already separated tithes from them, since the loss incurred by tithing is negligible, except for deyufra. The Gemara asks: What is deyufra? Ulla said: A tree that yields two [deyo] harvests of fruit [peirot] each year.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讚讬讜 驻专爪讜祝 驻谞讬诐 讛讬讛 诇讜 诇讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 砖谞讗诪专 讗讞讜专 讜拽讚诐 爪专转谞讬 讻转讬讘 讜讬讘谉 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 讗转 讛爪诇注 讜讙讜壮 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讞讚 讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讝谞讘


Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Adam was first created with two [deyo] faces, one male and the other female. As it is stated: 鈥淵ou have formed me behind and before, and laid Your hand upon me鈥 (Psalms 139:5). Similarly, it is written: 鈥淎nd the tzela, which the Lord, God, had taken from the man, He made a woman, and brought her unto the man鈥 (Genesis 2:22). Rav and Shmuel disagree over the meaning of the word tzela: One said: It means a female face, from which God created Eve; and one said: Adam was created with a tail [zanav], which God removed from him and from which He created Eve.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讗讞讜专 讜拽讚诐 爪专转谞讬 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讗讞讜专 讜拽讚诐 爪专转谞讬


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that tzela means face; it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淵ou have formed me [tzartani] behind and before.鈥 However, according to the one who says that tzela means tail, what is meant by the verse: 鈥淵ou have formed me [tzartani] behind and before鈥?


讻讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗讞讜专 诇诪注砖讛 讘专讗砖讬转 讜拽讚诐 诇驻讜专注谞讜转


The Gemara answers that this verse is to be understood as bearing a moral message, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ami, as Rabbi Ami said: Behind means Adam was created at the end of the act of creation; and before means that he was first for punishment.


讘砖诇诪讗 讗讞讜专 诇诪注砖讛 讘专讗砖讬转 讚诇讗 讗讬讘专讬 注讚 诪注诇讬 砖讘转讗 讗诇讗 讜拽讚诐 诇驻讜专注谞讜转 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诪砖讜诐 拽诇诇讛 讛讗 讘转讞讬诇讛 谞转拽诇诇 谞讞砖 讜诇讘住讜祝 谞转拽诇诇讛 讞讜讛 讜诇讘住讜祝 谞转拽诇诇 讗讚诐


The Gemara asks: Granted, it is understandable that Adam was behind, or last, in the act of creation, meaning that he was not created until the sixth day, Shabbat eve. However, before, or first, for punishment, what does this mean? If you say that he was punished first because of the curse pronounced in the wake of the sin involving the Tree of Knowledge, there is a difficulty. Wasn鈥檛 the snake was cursed first, and afterward Eve was cursed, and only at the end was Adam cursed?


讗诇讗 诇诪讘讜诇 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬诪讞 讗转 讻诇 讛讬拽讜诐 讗砖专 注诇 驻谞讬 讛讗讚诪讛 诪讗讚诐 讜注讚 讘讛诪讛 讜讙讜壮


Rather, this refers to the punishment of the Flood, as it is written: 鈥淎nd He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle, creeping things and fowl of the heaven鈥 (Genesis 7:23). This indicates that the punishment began with man.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讬爪专 转专讬谉 讬讜讚讬谉 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讜讬讬爪专


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was originally a face or side of Adam; it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淭hen the Lord God formed [vayyitzer] man鈥 (Genesis 2:7). Vayyitzer is written with a double yod, one for Adam and one for Eve. However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is conveyed by spelling vayyitzer with a double yod?


讻讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 驻讝讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 驻讝讬 讗讜讬 诇讬 诪讬爪专讬 讗讜讬 诇讬 诪讬讜爪专讬


The Gemara responds: This is interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, as Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said: This comes to emphasize that which one says to himself in every circumstance: Woe unto me from my evil inclination [yetzer] if I perform the will of my Maker, and woe to me from my Maker [Yotzri] if I perform the will of my inclination.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讝讻专 讜谞拽讘讛 讘专讗诐 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讝讻专 讜谞拽讘讛 讘专讗诐


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淢ale and female, He created them, and blessed them, and called their name Man in the day when they were created鈥 (Genesis 5:2), which indicates that from the very beginning of their creation, He fashioned two faces, one for the male and the other for the female. However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is the meaning of the verse: 鈥淢ale and female, He created them鈥?


诇讻讚专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讚专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 专诪讬 讻转讬讘 讝讻专 讜谞拽讘讛 讘专讗诐 讜讻转讬讘 (讻讬) 讘爪诇诐 讗诇讛讬诐 讘专讗 讗讜转讜 讘转讞诇讛 注诇转讛 讘诪讞砖讘讛 诇讘专讗讜转 砖谞讬诐 讜诇讘住讜祝 诇讗 谞讘专讗 讗诇讗 讗讞讚


The Gemara answers: It can be explained in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, as Rabbi Abbahu raised a contradiction between the verses: On the one hand it is written: 鈥淢ale and female, He created them,鈥 in the plural, and on the other hand it is written: 鈥淪o God created man in His own image, for in the image of God He created him鈥 (Genesis 1:27), in the singular. At first, the thought entered God鈥檚 mind to create two, and ultimately, only one was actually created.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬住讙讜专 讘砖专 转讞转谞讛 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 诪讗讬 讜讬住讙讜专 讘砖专 转讞转谞讛


The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淎nd He took one of his sides and closed up the flesh in its place鈥 (Genesis 2:21). However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is meant by the verse: 鈥淎nd He closed up the flesh in its place鈥?


讗诪专 专讘 讝讘讬讚 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诇讗 谞爪专讻讛 讗诇讗 诇诪拽讜诐 讞转讱


Rav Zevid said, and some say it was Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say it was Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k: It was necessary to say that the fleshed closed up only with regard to the place of the incision.


讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讝谞讘 讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讘谉 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 诪讗讬 讜讬讘谉


The Gemara challenges the other opinion: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail; it is understandable that it is written: 鈥淎nd the Lord God built the tzela鈥 (Genesis 2:22), as it was a completely new building. However, according to the one who said that Eve was a complete face or side, what is the meaning of: 鈥淎nd He built鈥? What needed to be built?


诇讻讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诪谞住讬讗 讚讚专讬砖 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诪谞住讬讗 讜讬讘谉 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 讗转 讛爪诇注 诪诇诪讚 砖拽讬诇注讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇讞讜讛 讜讛讘讬讗讛 诇讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 砖讻谉 讘讻专讻讬 讛讬诐 拽讜专讬谉 诇拽诇注讬转讗 讘谞讬讬转讗


The Gemara responds: This must be interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya, as Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya interpreted homiletically the verse: 鈥淎nd the Lord God built the tzela.鈥 This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, braided for Eve her hair, and then brought her to Adam, as in the coastal towns, they call braiding hair building.


讚讘专 讗讞专 讜讬讘谉 讛壮 讗诇讛讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 诪诇诪讚 砖讘谞讗讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇讞讜讛 讻讘谞讬讬谉


Alternatively, the verse: 鈥淎nd the Lord God built,鈥 can be understood as a description of Eve鈥檚 basic shape, as Rav 岣sda said, and some say it is taught in a baraita: This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, built Eve like the structure


讗讜爪专 诪讛 讗讜爪专 讝讛 专讞讘 诪诇诪讟讛 讜拽爪专 诪诇诪注诇讛 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗转 讛驻讬专讜转 讗祝 讛讗砖讛 专讞讘讛 诪诇诪讟讛 讜拽爪专讛 诪诇诪注诇讛 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 讗转 讛讜诇讚


of a storehouse. Just as a storehouse is built wide on the bottom and narrow on top, in order to hold produce without collapsing, so too a woman is created wide on the bottom and narrow on top, in order to hold the fetus.


讜讬讘讬讗讛 讗诇 讛讗讚诐 诪诇诪讚 砖注砖讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 砖讜砖讘讬谞讜转 诇讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 诪讻讗谉 诇讙讚讜诇 砖讬注砖讛 砖讜砖讘讬谞讜转 诇拽讟谉 讜讗诇 讬专注 诇讜


The Gemara cites an exposition of the end of the previously cited verse: 鈥淎nd brought her unto the man鈥 (Genesis 2:22). This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, was Adam the first man鈥檚 best man, attending to all his wedding needs and bringing his wife to him. From here we learn that a greater individual should serve as a best man for a lesser individual and should not feel bad about it as something beneath his dignity.


讜诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻专爪讜祝 讛讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 住讙讬 讘专讬砖讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诪住转讘专讗 讚讝讻专 住讙讬 讘专讬砖讗 讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬讛诇讱 讗讚诐 讗讞讜专讬 讗砖讛 讘讚专讱 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讬讗 讗砖转讜 谞讝讚诪谞讛 注诇 讛讙砖专 讬住诇拽谞讛 诇爪讚讚讬谉 讜讻诇 讛注讜讘专 讗讞讜专讬 讗砖讛 讘谞讛专 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞诇拽 诇注讜诇诐 讛讘讗:


The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that Eve was a face or side of Adam, which one of them walked in front? Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said: It is reasonable to say that the male walked in front, as this is proper behavior, as it was taught in a baraita: A man should not walk behind a woman on a path, even if she is his wife. If she happens upon him on a bridge, he should walk quickly in order to catch up to her and consequently move her to his side, so that she will not walk before him. And anyone who walks behind a woman in a river, where she has to lift up her skirt in order to cross, has no share in the World-to-Come.


转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪专爪讛 诪注讜转 诇讗砖讛 诪讬讚讜 诇讬讚讛 讗讜 诪讬讚讛 诇讬讚讜 讘砖讘讬诇 砖讬住转讻诇 讘讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讚讜诪讛 诇诪砖讛 专讘讬谞讜 砖拽讬讘诇 转讜专讛 诪讛专 住讬谞讬 诇讗 讬谞拽讛 诪讚讬谞讛 砖诇 讙讬讛谞诐 讜注诇讬讜 讛讻转讜讘 讗讜诪专 讬讚 诇讬讚 诇讗 讬谞拽讛 专注 诇讗 讬谞拽讛 诪讚讬谞讛 砖诇 讙讬讛谞诐


The Sages taught: With regard to one who counts out money for a woman from his hand into her hand or from her hand into his hand, in order to look upon her, even if in other matters he is like Moses our teacher, who received the Torah from Mount Sinai, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna. The verse says about him: 鈥淗and to hand, the evil man shall not go unpunished鈥 (Proverbs 11:21). One who hands money from his hand to her hand, even if he received the Torah from God鈥檚 hand to his own, like Moses, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna, which is called evil.


讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪谞讜讞 注诐 讛讗专抓 讛讬讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽诐 讜讬诇讱 诪谞讜讞 讗讞专讬 讗砖转讜


Rav Na岣an said: From the following verse, it is known that Samson鈥檚 father, Manoah, was an ignoramus, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Manoah arose, and went after his wife鈥 (Judges 13:11), which shows that he was unfamiliar with the principle that one must not walk behind a woman.


诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讙讘讬 讗诇拽谞讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬诇讱 讗诇拽谞讛 讗讞专讬 讗砖转讜 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讜讙讘讬 讗诇讬砖注 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽诐 讜讬诇讱 讗讞专讬讛 讛讻讬 谞诪讬


Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k strongly objects to this: If that is so, if the verse relating to Manoah is understood literally, what will one say about the verse with regard to Elkana, the father of the prophet Samuel, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Elkana walked after his wife.鈥 Does this verse mean that Elkana was also an ignorant person? And what of the verse with regard to the prophet Elisha, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the mother of the child said: As the Lord lives, and as your soul lives, I will not leave you; and he arose and followed her鈥 (ii Kings 4:30). Does this verse mean that Elisha was also an uneducated person?


讗诇讗 讗讞专讬 讚讘专讬讛 讜注爪转讛 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 讗讞专讬 讚讘专讬讛 讜注爪转讛


Rather, certainly each of these verses means that he followed her words and advice. If so, here too, the verse concerning Manoah may be similarly interpreted. He did not literally walk behind his wife, but rather he followed her words and advice.


讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讜诇诪讗讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪谞讜讞 注诐 讛讗专抓 讛讬讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬 专讘 谞诪讬 诇讗 拽专讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜转拽诐 专讘拽讛 讜谞注专讜转讬讛 讜转专讻讘谞讛 注诇 讛讙诪诇讬诐 讜转诇讻谞讛 讗讞专讬 讛讗讬砖 讜诇讗 诇驻谞讬 讛讗讬砖


Rav Ashi said: And according to what Rav Na岣an said, that Manoah was an ignoramus, he did not even read the basic Torah stories that children learn in school. As it is written: 鈥淩ebecca arose, and her damsels, and they rode upon the camels, and followed the man鈥 (Genesis 24:61); they followed him and did not walk before the man.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗讞专讬 讗专讬 讜诇讗 讗讞专讬 讗砖讛 讗讞专讬 讗砖讛 讜诇讗 讗讞专讬 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 讗讞讜专讬 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 讜诇讗 讗讞讜专讬 讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讘砖注讛 砖诪转驻诇诇讬谉


On this topic, Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It is preferable to walk behind a lion, and not behind a woman. And it is preferable to walk behind a woman and not behind idolatry. When a procession honoring idolatry is passing in the street, it is better to walk behind a woman than appear to be accompanying the idolatry. It is preferable to walk behind idolatry and not behind a synagogue at a time of prayer. By walking behind a synagogue at a time of prayer and not entering, one appears as though he were denying the God to Whom the congregation is directing its prayers.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻诇 讗讜转谉 讛砖谞讬诐 砖讛讬讛 讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 讘谞讬讚讜讬 讛讜诇讬讚 专讜讞讬谉 讜砖讬讚讬谉 讜诇讬诇讬谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讞讬 讗讚诐 砖诇砖讬诐 讜诪讗转 砖谞讛 讜讬讜诇讚 讘讚诪讜转讜 讻爪诇诪讜 诪讻诇诇 讚注讚 讛讗讬讚谞讗 诇讗讜 讻爪诇诪讜 讗讜诇讬讚


Having cited an aggadic statement of Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar, the Gemara cites other statements of his: Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: All those years during which Adam was ostracized for the sin involving the Tree of Knowledge, he bore spirits, demons, and female demons, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth鈥 (Genesis 5:3). By inference, until now, the age of one hundred thirty, he did not bear after his image, but rather bore other creatures.


诪讬转讬讘讬 讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗讚诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 讞住讬讚 讙讚讜诇 讛讬讛 讻讬讜谉 砖专讗讛 砖谞拽谞住讛 诪讬转讛 注诇 讬讚讜 讬砖讘 讘转注谞讬转 诪讗讛 砖诇砖讬诐 砖谞讛 讜驻讬专砖 诪谉 讛讗砖讛 诪讗讛 砖诇砖讬诐 砖谞讛 讜讛注诇讛 讝专讝讬 转讗谞讬诐 注诇 讘砖专讜 诪讗讛 砖诇砖讬诐 砖谞讛


The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: Adam the first man was very pious. When he saw that death was imposed as a punishment because of him, he observed a fast for a hundred thirty years, and he separated from his wife for a hundred thirty years, and wore belts [zarzei] of fig leaves on his body as his only garment for a hundred thirty years. If so, how did he father demons into the world?


讻讬 拽讗诪专讬谞谉 讛讛讜讗 讘砖讻讘转 讝专注 讚讞讝讗 诇讗讜谞住讬讛


The Gemara answers: When Rabbi Yirmeya made his statement, he meant that those destructive creatures were formed from the semen that Adam accidentally emitted, which brought the destructive creatures into being.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪拽爪转 砖讘讞讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讘驻谞讬讜 讜讻讜诇讜 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 诪拽爪转 砖讘讞讜 讘驻谞讬讜 讚讻转讬讘 讻讬 讗讜转讱 专讗讬转讬 爪讚讬拽 诇驻谞讬 讘讚讜专 讛讝讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar further said: Only some of a person鈥檚 praise should be said in his presence, and all of it may be said not in his presence. Only some of his praise should be said in his presence, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Noah, come, you and all your house into the ark, for you have I seen righteous before Me in this generation鈥 (Genesis 7:1).


讻讜诇讜 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讚讻转讬讘 谞讞 讗讬砖 爪讚讬拽 转诪讬诐 讛讬讛 讘讚讜专讜转讬讜


And all of it may be said not in his presence, as it is written: 鈥淭hese are the generations of Noah; Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God鈥 (Genesis 6:9). When not referring to him in his presence, God refers to Noah as a righteous and perfect man.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讛谞讛 注诇讛 讝讬转 讟专祝 讘驻讬讛 讗诪专讛 讬讜谞讛 诇驻谞讬 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 专讘讜谞讜 砖诇 注讜诇诐 讬讛讬讜 诪讝讜谞讜转讬 诪专讜专讬谉 讻讝讬转 讜诪住讜专讬谉 讘讬讚讱 讜讗诇 讬讛讬讜 诪转讜拽讬谉 讻讚讘砖 讜转诇讜讬谉 讘讬讚 讘砖专 讜讚诐 讻转讬讘 讛讻讗 讟专祝 讜讻转讬讘 讛转诐 讛讟专讬驻谞讬 诇讞诐 讞讜拽讬


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淎nd the dove came in to him in the evening, and lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf, plucked off [taraf]; so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth鈥 (Genesis 8:11)? The dove said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, let my food be bitter as an olive but given into Your hand, and let it not be sweet as honey but dependent upon flesh and blood. He adds this explanation: Here it is written: Taraf. And there it is written: 鈥淩emove far from me falsehood and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me [hatrifeni] my allotted portion鈥 (Proverbs 30:8).


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻诇 讘讬转 砖谞砖诪注讬谉 讘讜 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讘诇讬诇讛 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讜 谞讞专讘 砖谞讗诪专 讜诇讗 讗诪专 讗讬讛 讗诇讜讛 注讜砖讬 谞讜转谉 讝诪讬专讜转 讘诇讬诇讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Any house in which the words of Torah are heard at night will never be destroyed, as it is stated: 鈥淏ut none says: Where is God my Maker, Who gives songs in the night鈥 (Job 35:10). The verse implies that one who sings songs of Torah in his house at night will not need to lament the destruction of his home.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪讬讜诐 砖讞专讘 讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讚讬讜 诇注讜诇诐 砖讬砖转诪砖 讘砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 砖谞讗诪专 讻诇 讛谞砖诪讛 转讛诇诇 讬讛 讛诇诇讜讬讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar further said: From the day that the Temple was destroyed, it is enough for the world to use in its praise of God, or in greeting one another with the name of God, only two letters of the Tetragrammaton, namely yod and heh, as it is stated: 鈥淟et everything that has breath praise the Lord [Yah]. Halleluya (Psalms 150:6), without mentioning the full name of God, comprised of four letters.


讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 谞转拽诇诇讛 讘讘诇 谞转拽诇诇讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 谞转拽诇诇讛 砖讜诪专讜谉 谞转讘专讻讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 谞转拽诇诇讛 讘讘诇 谞转拽诇诇讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜砖诪转讬讛 诇诪讜专砖 拽讬驻讜讚 讜讗讙诪讬 诪讬诐 谞转拽诇诇讛 砖讜诪专讜谉 谞转讘专讻讜 砖讻讬谞讬讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜砖诪转讬 砖讜诪专讜谉 诇注讬 讛砖讚讛


And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: When Babylonia was cursed, its neighbors were cursed along with it. When Samaria was cursed, its neighbors were blessed. He explains: When Babylonia was cursed, its neighbors were cursed, as it is written: 鈥淚 will also make it a possession for wild birds, and pools of water鈥 (Isaiah 14:23), and the arrival of predatory animals brings harm to the surrounding neighbors as well. When Samaria was cursed, its neighbors were blessed, as it is written: 鈥淭herefore I will turn Samaria into a heap of rubble in the field


Scroll To Top