Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

August 27, 2020 | ז׳ באלול תש״פ

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.

להרחיק כל שהוא ובלבד שירבה בפסין רבי יהודה אומר עד בית סאתים

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’a, which is an area of five thousand square cubits.

אמרו לו לא אמרו בית סאתים אלא לגנה ולקרפף אבל אם היה דיר או סהר או מוקצה או חצר אפילו בית חמשת כורין אפילו בית עשרה כורין מותר ומותר להרחיק כל שהוא ובלבד שירבה בפסין:

The Rabbis said to him: They only spoke of an area of two beit se’a 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.

גמ׳ לימא מתניתין דלא כחנניא דתניא עושין פסין לבור וחבלין לשיירא וחנניא אומר חבלין לבור אבל לא פסין

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

אפילו תימא חנניא בור לחוד באר לחוד

The Gemara rejects this suggestion: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya, 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.

איכא דאמרי מדלא קתני חנניא אומר עושין חבלין לבור ופסין לבאר מכלל דלחנניא לא שנא בור ולא שנא באר חבלין אין פסין לא לימא מתניתין דלא כחנניא

Some say a different version of the previous passage: From the fact that the baraita does not teach: Ḥananya says: One may set up ropes around a water cistern and boards around a well, by inference, according to the opinion of Ḥananya, 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 Ḥananya.

אפילו תימא חנניא למאי דקאמר תנא קמא קא מהדר ליה

The Gemara rejects this argument: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya, 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 Ḥananya to fully clarify his own position and distinguish between a cistern and a well.

לימא מתניתין דלא כרבי עקיבא דתנן אחד באר הרבים ובור הרבים ובאר היחיד עושין להן פסין אבל בור היחיד עושין לו מחיצה גבוה עשרה טפחים דברי רבי עקיבא

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.

ואילו הכא קתני לביראות לביראות אין לבורות לא

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’s opinion, which maintains that posts may be arranged for a public cistern.

אפילו תימא רבי עקיבא באר מים חיים דפסיקא ליה לא שנא דרבים ולא שנא דיחיד קתני בור מכונסין דלא פסיקא ליה לא קתני

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.

לימא מתניתין דלא כרבי יהודה בן בבא דתנן רבי יהודה בן בבא אומר אין עושין פסין אלא לבאר הרבים בלבד ואילו הכא קתני לביראות לא שנא דרבים ולא שנא דיחיד

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.

אפילו תימא רבי יהודה בן בבא מאי ביראות ביראות דעלמא

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.

מאי דיומדין אמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר דיו עמודין:

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.

דיו למנודה שבח זונית נתקלקל במידה שלשה סימן:

Having cited Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar’s 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.

תנן התם רבי יהודה אומר כל השיתין פטורין חוץ מן הדיופרא מאי דיופרא אמר עולא אילן העושה דיו פירות בשנה

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’aretz, 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.

אמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר דיו פרצוף פנים היה לו לאדם הראשון שנאמר אחור וקדם צרתני כתיב ויבן ה׳ אלהים את הצלע וגו׳ רב ושמואל חד אמר פרצוף וחד אמר זנב

Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Adam was first created with two [deyo] faces, one male and the other female. As it is stated: “You have formed me behind and before, and laid Your hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5). Similarly, it is written: “And the tzela, which the Lord, God, had taken from the man, He made a woman, and brought her unto the man” (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.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב אחור וקדם צרתני אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי אחור וקדם צרתני

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

כדרבי אמי דאמר רבי אמי אחור למעשה בראשית וקדם לפורענות

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.

בשלמא אחור למעשה בראשית דלא איברי עד מעלי שבתא אלא וקדם לפורענות מאי היא אילימא משום קללה הא בתחילה נתקלל נחש ולבסוף נתקללה חוה ולבסוף נתקלל אדם

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’t the snake was cursed first, and afterward Eve was cursed, and only at the end was Adam cursed?

אלא למבול דכתיב וימח את כל היקום אשר על פני האדמה מאדם ועד בהמה וגו׳

Rather, this refers to the punishment of the Flood, as it is written: “And 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” (Genesis 7:23). This indicates that the punishment began with man.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב וייצר תרין יודין אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי וייצר

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: “Then the Lord God formed [vayyitzer] man” (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?

כדרבי שמעון בן פזי דאמר רבי שמעון בן פזי אוי לי מיצרי אוי לי מיוצרי

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.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב זכר ונקבה בראם אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי זכר ונקבה בראם

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understanable that it is written: “Male and female, He created them, and blessed them, and called their name Man in the day when they were created” (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: “Male and female, He created them”?

לכדרבי אבהו דרבי אבהו רמי כתיב זכר ונקבה בראם וכתיב (כי) בצלם אלהים ברא אותו בתחלה עלתה במחשבה לבראות שנים ולבסוף לא נברא אלא אחד

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: “Male and female, He created them,” in the plural, and on the other hand it is written: “So God created man in His own image, for in the image of God He created him” (Genesis 1:27), in the singular. At first, the thought entered God’s mind to create two, and ultimately, only one was actually created.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב ויסגור בשר תחתנה אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי ויסגור בשר תחתנה

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

אמר רב זביד ואיתימא רבי ירמיה ואיתימא רב נחמן בר יצחק לא נצרכה אלא למקום חתך

Rav Zevid said, and some say it was Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say it was Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: It was necessary to say that the fleshed closed up only with regard to the place of the incision.

בשלמא למאן דאמר זנב היינו דכתיב ויבן אלא למאן דאמר פרצוף מאי ויבן

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: “And the Lord God built the tzela” (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: “And He built”? What needed to be built?

לכדרבי שמעון בן מנסיא דדריש רבי שמעון בן מנסיא ויבן ה׳ אלהים את הצלע מלמד שקילעה הקדוש ברוך הוא לחוה והביאה לאדם הראשון שכן בכרכי הים קורין לקלעיתא בנייתא

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: “And the Lord God built the tzela.” 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.

דבר אחר ויבן ה׳ אלהים אמר רב חסדא ואמרי לה במתניתא תנא מלמד שבנאה הקדוש ברוך הוא לחוה כבניין

Alternatively, the verse: “And the Lord God built,” can be understood as a description of Eve’s basic shape, as Rav Ḥisda 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

אוצר מה אוצר זה רחב מלמטה וקצר מלמעלה כדי לקבל את הפירות אף האשה רחבה מלמטה וקצרה מלמעלה כדי לקבל את הולד

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.

ויביאה אל האדם מלמד שעשה הקדוש ברוך הוא שושבינות לאדם הראשון מכאן לגדול שיעשה שושבינות לקטן ואל ירע לו

The Gemara cites an exposition of the end of the previously cited verse: “And brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22). This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, was Adam the first man’s 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.

ולמאן דאמר פרצוף הי מינייהו סגי ברישא אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מסתברא דזכר סגי ברישא דתניא לא יהלך אדם אחורי אשה בדרך ואפילו היא אשתו נזדמנה על הגשר יסלקנה לצדדין וכל העובר אחורי אשה בנהר אין לו חלק לעולם הבא:

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 Naḥman bar Yitzḥak 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.

תנו רבנן המרצה מעות לאשה מידו לידה או מידה לידו בשביל שיסתכל בה אפילו דומה למשה רבינו שקיבל תורה מהר סיני לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם ועליו הכתוב אומר יד ליד לא ינקה רע לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם

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: “Hand to hand, the evil man shall not go unpunished” (Proverbs 11:21). One who hands money from his hand to her hand, even if he received the Torah from God’s hand to his own, like Moses, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna, which is called evil.

אמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה שנאמר ויקם וילך מנוח אחרי אשתו

Rav Naḥman said: From the following verse, it is known that Samson’s father, Manoah, was an ignoramus, as it is stated: “And Manoah arose, and went after his wife” (Judges 13:11), which shows that he was unfamiliar with the principle that one must not walk behind a woman.

מתקיף לה רב נחמן בר יצחק אלא מעתה גבי אלקנה דכתיב וילך אלקנה אחרי אשתו הכי נמי וגבי אלישע דכתיב ויקם וילך אחריה הכי נמי

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak 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: “And Elkana walked after his wife.” 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: “And 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” (ii Kings 4:30). Does this verse mean that Elisha was also an uneducated person?

אלא אחרי דבריה ועצתה הכא נמי אחרי דבריה ועצתה

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.

אמר רב אשי ולמאי דאמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה אפילו בי רב נמי לא קרא דכתיב ותקם רבקה ונערותיה ותרכבנה על הגמלים ותלכנה אחרי האיש ולא לפני האיש

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

אמר רבי יוחנן אחרי ארי ולא אחרי אשה אחרי אשה ולא אחרי עבודה זרה אחורי עבודה זרה ולא אחורי בית הכנסת בשעה שמתפללין

On this topic, Rabbi Yoḥanan 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.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר כל אותן השנים שהיה אדם הראשון בנידוי הוליד רוחין ושידין ולילין שנאמר ויחי אדם שלשים ומאת שנה ויולד בדמותו כצלמו מכלל דעד האידנא לאו כצלמו אוליד

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: “And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth” (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.

מיתיבי היה רבי מאיר אומר אדם הראשון חסיד גדול היה כיון שראה שנקנסה מיתה על ידו ישב בתענית מאה שלשים שנה ופירש מן האשה מאה שלשים שנה והעלה זרזי תאנים על בשרו מאה שלשים שנה

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?

כי קאמרינן ההוא בשכבת זרע דחזא לאונסיה

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.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר מקצת שבחו של אדם אומרים בפניו וכולו שלא בפניו מקצת שבחו בפניו דכתיב כי אותך ראיתי צדיק לפני בדור הזה

And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar further said: Only some of a person’s 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: “And 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” (Genesis 7:1).

כולו שלא בפניו דכתיב נח איש צדיק תמים היה בדורותיו

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

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר מאי דכתיב והנה עלה זית טרף בפיה אמרה יונה לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא רבונו של עולם יהיו מזונותי מרורין כזית ומסורין בידך ואל יהיו מתוקין כדבש ותלוין ביד בשר ודם כתיב הכא טרף וכתיב התם הטריפני לחם חוקי

And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And 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” (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: “Remove far from me falsehood and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me [hatrifeni] my allotted portion” (Proverbs 30:8).

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר כל בית שנשמעין בו דברי תורה בלילה שוב אינו נחרב שנאמר ולא אמר איה אלוה עושי נותן זמירות בלילה

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: “But none says: Where is God my Maker, Who gives songs in the night” (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.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר מיום שחרב בית המקדש דיו לעולם שישתמש בשתי אותיות שנאמר כל הנשמה תהלל יה הללויה

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: “Let everything that has breath praise the Lord [Yah]. Halleluya (Psalms 150:6), without mentioning the full name of God, comprised of four letters.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכיניה נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכיניה נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכיניה דכתיב ושמתיה למורש קיפוד ואגמי מים נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכיניה דכתיב ושמתי שומרון לעי השדה

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: “I will also make it a possession for wild birds, and pools of water” (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: “Therefore 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

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...
Cistern or Spring?

Cistern or Spring?

Eruvin 18 The Mishnah brings a discussion about how to enclose a water source so that it can be used...

Eruvin 18

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Eruvin 18

להרחיק כל שהוא ובלבד שירבה בפסין רבי יהודה אומר עד בית סאתים

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’a, which is an area of five thousand square cubits.

אמרו לו לא אמרו בית סאתים אלא לגנה ולקרפף אבל אם היה דיר או סהר או מוקצה או חצר אפילו בית חמשת כורין אפילו בית עשרה כורין מותר ומותר להרחיק כל שהוא ובלבד שירבה בפסין:

The Rabbis said to him: They only spoke of an area of two beit se’a 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.

גמ׳ לימא מתניתין דלא כחנניא דתניא עושין פסין לבור וחבלין לשיירא וחנניא אומר חבלין לבור אבל לא פסין

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

אפילו תימא חנניא בור לחוד באר לחוד

The Gemara rejects this suggestion: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya, 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.

איכא דאמרי מדלא קתני חנניא אומר עושין חבלין לבור ופסין לבאר מכלל דלחנניא לא שנא בור ולא שנא באר חבלין אין פסין לא לימא מתניתין דלא כחנניא

Some say a different version of the previous passage: From the fact that the baraita does not teach: Ḥananya says: One may set up ropes around a water cistern and boards around a well, by inference, according to the opinion of Ḥananya, 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 Ḥananya.

אפילו תימא חנניא למאי דקאמר תנא קמא קא מהדר ליה

The Gemara rejects this argument: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya, 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 Ḥananya to fully clarify his own position and distinguish between a cistern and a well.

לימא מתניתין דלא כרבי עקיבא דתנן אחד באר הרבים ובור הרבים ובאר היחיד עושין להן פסין אבל בור היחיד עושין לו מחיצה גבוה עשרה טפחים דברי רבי עקיבא

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.

ואילו הכא קתני לביראות לביראות אין לבורות לא

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’s opinion, which maintains that posts may be arranged for a public cistern.

אפילו תימא רבי עקיבא באר מים חיים דפסיקא ליה לא שנא דרבים ולא שנא דיחיד קתני בור מכונסין דלא פסיקא ליה לא קתני

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.

לימא מתניתין דלא כרבי יהודה בן בבא דתנן רבי יהודה בן בבא אומר אין עושין פסין אלא לבאר הרבים בלבד ואילו הכא קתני לביראות לא שנא דרבים ולא שנא דיחיד

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.

אפילו תימא רבי יהודה בן בבא מאי ביראות ביראות דעלמא

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.

מאי דיומדין אמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר דיו עמודין:

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.

דיו למנודה שבח זונית נתקלקל במידה שלשה סימן:

Having cited Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar’s 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.

תנן התם רבי יהודה אומר כל השיתין פטורין חוץ מן הדיופרא מאי דיופרא אמר עולא אילן העושה דיו פירות בשנה

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’aretz, 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.

אמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר דיו פרצוף פנים היה לו לאדם הראשון שנאמר אחור וקדם צרתני כתיב ויבן ה׳ אלהים את הצלע וגו׳ רב ושמואל חד אמר פרצוף וחד אמר זנב

Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Adam was first created with two [deyo] faces, one male and the other female. As it is stated: “You have formed me behind and before, and laid Your hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5). Similarly, it is written: “And the tzela, which the Lord, God, had taken from the man, He made a woman, and brought her unto the man” (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.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב אחור וקדם צרתני אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי אחור וקדם צרתני

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

כדרבי אמי דאמר רבי אמי אחור למעשה בראשית וקדם לפורענות

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.

בשלמא אחור למעשה בראשית דלא איברי עד מעלי שבתא אלא וקדם לפורענות מאי היא אילימא משום קללה הא בתחילה נתקלל נחש ולבסוף נתקללה חוה ולבסוף נתקלל אדם

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’t the snake was cursed first, and afterward Eve was cursed, and only at the end was Adam cursed?

אלא למבול דכתיב וימח את כל היקום אשר על פני האדמה מאדם ועד בהמה וגו׳

Rather, this refers to the punishment of the Flood, as it is written: “And 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” (Genesis 7:23). This indicates that the punishment began with man.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב וייצר תרין יודין אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי וייצר

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: “Then the Lord God formed [vayyitzer] man” (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?

כדרבי שמעון בן פזי דאמר רבי שמעון בן פזי אוי לי מיצרי אוי לי מיוצרי

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.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב זכר ונקבה בראם אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי זכר ונקבה בראם

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understanable that it is written: “Male and female, He created them, and blessed them, and called their name Man in the day when they were created” (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: “Male and female, He created them”?

לכדרבי אבהו דרבי אבהו רמי כתיב זכר ונקבה בראם וכתיב (כי) בצלם אלהים ברא אותו בתחלה עלתה במחשבה לבראות שנים ולבסוף לא נברא אלא אחד

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: “Male and female, He created them,” in the plural, and on the other hand it is written: “So God created man in His own image, for in the image of God He created him” (Genesis 1:27), in the singular. At first, the thought entered God’s mind to create two, and ultimately, only one was actually created.

בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב ויסגור בשר תחתנה אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי ויסגור בשר תחתנה

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

אמר רב זביד ואיתימא רבי ירמיה ואיתימא רב נחמן בר יצחק לא נצרכה אלא למקום חתך

Rav Zevid said, and some say it was Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say it was Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: It was necessary to say that the fleshed closed up only with regard to the place of the incision.

בשלמא למאן דאמר זנב היינו דכתיב ויבן אלא למאן דאמר פרצוף מאי ויבן

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: “And the Lord God built the tzela” (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: “And He built”? What needed to be built?

לכדרבי שמעון בן מנסיא דדריש רבי שמעון בן מנסיא ויבן ה׳ אלהים את הצלע מלמד שקילעה הקדוש ברוך הוא לחוה והביאה לאדם הראשון שכן בכרכי הים קורין לקלעיתא בנייתא

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: “And the Lord God built the tzela.” 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.

דבר אחר ויבן ה׳ אלהים אמר רב חסדא ואמרי לה במתניתא תנא מלמד שבנאה הקדוש ברוך הוא לחוה כבניין

Alternatively, the verse: “And the Lord God built,” can be understood as a description of Eve’s basic shape, as Rav Ḥisda 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

אוצר מה אוצר זה רחב מלמטה וקצר מלמעלה כדי לקבל את הפירות אף האשה רחבה מלמטה וקצרה מלמעלה כדי לקבל את הולד

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.

ויביאה אל האדם מלמד שעשה הקדוש ברוך הוא שושבינות לאדם הראשון מכאן לגדול שיעשה שושבינות לקטן ואל ירע לו

The Gemara cites an exposition of the end of the previously cited verse: “And brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22). This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, was Adam the first man’s 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.

ולמאן דאמר פרצוף הי מינייהו סגי ברישא אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מסתברא דזכר סגי ברישא דתניא לא יהלך אדם אחורי אשה בדרך ואפילו היא אשתו נזדמנה על הגשר יסלקנה לצדדין וכל העובר אחורי אשה בנהר אין לו חלק לעולם הבא:

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 Naḥman bar Yitzḥak 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.

תנו רבנן המרצה מעות לאשה מידו לידה או מידה לידו בשביל שיסתכל בה אפילו דומה למשה רבינו שקיבל תורה מהר סיני לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם ועליו הכתוב אומר יד ליד לא ינקה רע לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם

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: “Hand to hand, the evil man shall not go unpunished” (Proverbs 11:21). One who hands money from his hand to her hand, even if he received the Torah from God’s hand to his own, like Moses, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna, which is called evil.

אמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה שנאמר ויקם וילך מנוח אחרי אשתו

Rav Naḥman said: From the following verse, it is known that Samson’s father, Manoah, was an ignoramus, as it is stated: “And Manoah arose, and went after his wife” (Judges 13:11), which shows that he was unfamiliar with the principle that one must not walk behind a woman.

מתקיף לה רב נחמן בר יצחק אלא מעתה גבי אלקנה דכתיב וילך אלקנה אחרי אשתו הכי נמי וגבי אלישע דכתיב ויקם וילך אחריה הכי נמי

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak 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: “And Elkana walked after his wife.” 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: “And 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” (ii Kings 4:30). Does this verse mean that Elisha was also an uneducated person?

אלא אחרי דבריה ועצתה הכא נמי אחרי דבריה ועצתה

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.

אמר רב אשי ולמאי דאמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה אפילו בי רב נמי לא קרא דכתיב ותקם רבקה ונערותיה ותרכבנה על הגמלים ותלכנה אחרי האיש ולא לפני האיש

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

אמר רבי יוחנן אחרי ארי ולא אחרי אשה אחרי אשה ולא אחרי עבודה זרה אחורי עבודה זרה ולא אחורי בית הכנסת בשעה שמתפללין

On this topic, Rabbi Yoḥanan 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.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר כל אותן השנים שהיה אדם הראשון בנידוי הוליד רוחין ושידין ולילין שנאמר ויחי אדם שלשים ומאת שנה ויולד בדמותו כצלמו מכלל דעד האידנא לאו כצלמו אוליד

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: “And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth” (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.

מיתיבי היה רבי מאיר אומר אדם הראשון חסיד גדול היה כיון שראה שנקנסה מיתה על ידו ישב בתענית מאה שלשים שנה ופירש מן האשה מאה שלשים שנה והעלה זרזי תאנים על בשרו מאה שלשים שנה

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?

כי קאמרינן ההוא בשכבת זרע דחזא לאונסיה

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.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר מקצת שבחו של אדם אומרים בפניו וכולו שלא בפניו מקצת שבחו בפניו דכתיב כי אותך ראיתי צדיק לפני בדור הזה

And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar further said: Only some of a person’s 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: “And 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” (Genesis 7:1).

כולו שלא בפניו דכתיב נח איש צדיק תמים היה בדורותיו

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

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר מאי דכתיב והנה עלה זית טרף בפיה אמרה יונה לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא רבונו של עולם יהיו מזונותי מרורין כזית ומסורין בידך ואל יהיו מתוקין כדבש ותלוין ביד בשר ודם כתיב הכא טרף וכתיב התם הטריפני לחם חוקי

And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And 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” (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: “Remove far from me falsehood and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me [hatrifeni] my allotted portion” (Proverbs 30:8).

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר כל בית שנשמעין בו דברי תורה בלילה שוב אינו נחרב שנאמר ולא אמר איה אלוה עושי נותן זמירות בלילה

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: “But none says: Where is God my Maker, Who gives songs in the night” (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.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר מיום שחרב בית המקדש דיו לעולם שישתמש בשתי אותיות שנאמר כל הנשמה תהלל יה הללויה

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: “Let everything that has breath praise the Lord [Yah]. Halleluya (Psalms 150:6), without mentioning the full name of God, comprised of four letters.

ואמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכיניה נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכיניה נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכיניה דכתיב ושמתיה למורש קיפוד ואגמי מים נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכיניה דכתיב ושמתי שומרון לעי השדה

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: “I will also make it a possession for wild birds, and pools of water” (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: “Therefore I will turn Samaria into a heap of rubble in the field

Join Hadran Communities! Connect with women learning in your area.

Scroll To Top