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

Today's Daf Yomi

October 5, 2020 | 讬状讝 讘转砖专讬 转砖驻状讗

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.

  • This month's learning聽is sponsored by Leah Goldford in loving memory of聽her grandmothers, Tzipporah bat Yechezkiel, Rivka Yoda Bat聽Dovide Tzvi, Bracha Bayla bat Beryl, her father-in-law, Chaim Gershon ben Tzvi Aryeh, her mother, Devorah Rivkah bat Tuvia Hacohen, her cousins, Avrum Baer ben Mordechai, and Sharon bat Yaakov.

Eruvin 57

The gemara brings two more explanations regarding the Levite cities to explain how the empty space around the city comes out to a quarter – how is it measured and a quarter of what? Some questions are raised on some of the explanations. The mishna brings a debate between Rabbi Meir and the rabbis. According to Rabbi Meir, the 2,000 cubits of the techum are measured from 70.67 cubits outside the city. According to the rabbis, this is not the case – it is measured from the city borders but the 70.67 measurement is used to determine if two cities are considered as one for techum. There is a debate between emoraim whether it is a space of 70.67 per city or 70.67 all together. There is a situation where one city can combine two others that are on either side. What is that situation? The mishna begins to describe exactly how they did the measuring for the city.

讚诇 讗专讘注 讚转讞讜诪讬谉 讜讗专讘注 讚拽专谞讜转 讻诪讛 讛讜讬 转诪谞讬讗


Subtract four million square cubits of the extended boundary for the area of the open space, which is a thousand cubits by a thousand cubits on each side, and an additional four million square cubits from the corners, a thousand cubits by a thousand cubits in each corner, which are connected to the open space. How much is the sum total? It is eight million square cubits.


转讬诇转讗 讛讜讜 诪讬 住讘专转 讘专讘讜注讗 拽讗诪专 讘注讬讙讜诇讗 拽讗诪专 讻诪讛 诪专讜讘注 讬转专 注诇 讛注讙讜诇 专讘讬注 讚诇 专讘讬注 驻砖讜 诇讛 砖讬转讗 讜砖讬转讗 诪注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注 专讬讘注讗 讛讜讬


The Gemara asks: According to this calculation, the eight million square cubits of open space are one-third of the total area of the extended boundary, which is twenty-four million square cubits. The Gemara answers as it answered above: Do you think that this halakha was stated with regard to a square city? It was stated with regard to a round city. How much larger is the area of a square than the area of a circle? It is one quarter of the area of the circle. Subtract one quarter from the eight million square cubits of open space, and six million square cubits are left; and six is precisely one quarter of twenty-four.


专讘讬谞讗 讗诪专 诪讗讬 专讘讬注 专讘讬注 讚转讞讜诪讬谉


Ravina said: What is the meaning of the statement that the open space is one quarter? It is one quarter of the boundary. This halakha was indeed stated with regard to a square city. However, there is open space only along the sides of the city but not at its corners. Accordingly, a city that is two thousand cubits by two thousand cubits has a total extended boundary of thirty-two million square cubits, of which eight million square cubits, two thousand cubits by one thousand cubits on each side, is open space. The open space is thus one quarter of the total.


专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪讗讬 专讘讬注 专讘讬注 讚拽专谞讜转


Rav Ashi said the opposite: What is the meaning of the statement that the open space is one quarter of the total extended boundary? One quarter of the corners. Open space is granted only in the corners, and not along the sides. Accordingly, the open space is one thousand cubits by a thousand cubits in each corner, for a total of four million square cubits. The total extended boundary in each corner is two thousand cubits by two thousand cubits, or four million square cubits per corner, which equals a grand total of sixteen million square cubits. Consequently, the open space is one quarter of the total extended boundary.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谞讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讛讗 住讘讬讘 讻转讬讘


Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Isn鈥檛 it written in the verse: 鈥淎nd the open spaces of the cities, that you shall give to the Levites, shall be from the wall of the city and outward one thousand cubits around鈥 (Numbers 35:4)? The verse indicates that the city is provided with open space on all sides and not merely at its corners


诪讗讬 住讘讬讘 住讘讬讘 讚拽专谞讜转 讚讗讬 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讙讘讬 注讜诇讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讝专拽讜 (讘谞讬 讗讛专谉) 讗转 讛讚诐 注诇 讛诪讝讘讞 住讘讬讘 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 住讘讬讘 诪诪砖 讗诇讗 诪讗讬 住讘讬讘 住讘讬讘 讚拽专谞讜转 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪讗讬 住讘讬讘 住讘讬讘 讚拽专谞讜转


Rav Ashi responded: What is the meaning of around? Around at the corners, i.e., an open space of this size is provided at each corner. As, if you do not say so, that the area of the corners is also called around, with regard to the burnt-offering, as it is written: 鈥淎nd they shall sprinkle the blood around upon the altar鈥 (Leviticus 1:5), here, too, will you say that the blood must be sprinkled literally 鈥渁round鈥 the altar on all sides? The blood is sprinkled only upon the corners of the altar. Rather, what is the meaning of around? Around the corners, i.e., the mitzva is to sprinkle the blood at the corners, and this is considered sprinkling blood 鈥渁round upon the altar.鈥 Here too, with regard to the open space of the cities of the Levites, what is the meaning of around? Around the corners.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讞讘讬讘讬 诪讞讜讝谞讗讛 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讛讗 讗讬讻讗 诪讜专砖讗 讚拽专谞转讗


The Gemara returns to its previous statement that the open space around a city of the Levites is one quarter of the total extended boundary when the city is round. It questions this statement based upon the mishna鈥檚 ruling that the boundaries of a city are always delineated as a square. Rav 岣vivi from Me岣za said to Rav Ashi: But aren鈥檛 there the protrusions of the corners? How can there be a thousand cubits of open space on each side; when the city is squared, the corners of the square protrude into the open space, thus reducing its area?


讘诪转讗 注讬讙讜诇转讗 讜讛讗 专讬讘注讜讛 讗讬诪讜专 讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讝讬谞谉 讻诪讗谉 讚诪专讘注讗 专讘讜注讬 讜讚讗讬 诪讬 诪专讘注谞讗


Rav Ashi replied: We are dealing with a circular city. Rav 岣vivi responded: But haven鈥檛 they squared the city? Rav Ashi responded: Say that we say the following: We view the city as if it were squared. Do we actually add houses and square it? Although for the purpose of calculating the extended boundary we view the city as a square, in actuality the uninhabited sections are part of the open space.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讞谞讬诇讗讬 诪讞讜讝谞讗讛 诇专讘 讗砖讬 诪讻讚讬 讻诪讛 诪专讜讘注 讬转专 注诇 讛注讙讜诇 专讘讬注 讛谞讬 转诪谞讬 诪讗讛 砖讬转 诪讗讛 讜砖讬转讬谉 讜砖讘注 谞讻讬 转讬诇转讗 讛讜讬


Rav 岣nilai from Me岣za said to Rav Ashi: Now, how much larger is the area of a square than the area of a circle? One quarter. Therefore, if we calculate how much area a circular city with a diameter of two thousand cubits gains when it is squared, does it add up to these eight hundred cubits mentioned above? The extra area added is only 667 minus one-third cubits.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘注讬讙讜诇讗 诪讙讜 专讘讜注 讗讘诇 讘讗诇讻住讜谞讗 讘注讬谞讗 讟驻讬 讚讗诪专 诪专 讻诇 讗诪转讗 讘专讬讘讜注 讗诪转讗 讜转专讬 讞讜诪砖讬 讘讗诇讻住讜谞讗:


Rav Ashi said to him: This statement applies only to a circle enclosed within a square, as the area of a circle is three-quarters the area of the square around it. However, with regard to the additional diagonal [alakhsona] space added in the corners of the square, more is required. As the Master said: Every cubit in the side of a square is one and two-fifths cubits in its diagonal. Based on this rule, the calculation is exact.


诪转谞讬壮 谞讜转谞讬谉 拽专驻祝 诇注讬专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专讜 拽专驻祝 讗诇讗 讘讬谉 砖转讬 注讬讬专讜转 讗诐 讬砖 诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 讜诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 注讜砖讛 拽专驻祝 讗转 砖转讬讛谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚


MISHNA: One allocates a karpef to every city, i.e., the measure of a karpef, which is slightly more than seventy cubits, is added to every city, and the two thousand cubits of the Shabbat limit are measured from there; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: They spoke of the addition of a karpef only with regard to the space between two adjacent cities. How so? If this city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on one side, and that city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on the adjacent side, and the two areas of seventy-plus cubits overlap, the karpef combines the two cities into one.


讜讻谉 砖诇砖讛 讻驻专讬诐 讛诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 讗诐 讬砖 讘讬谉 砖谞讬诐 讞讬爪讜谞讬诐 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖 注砖讛 讗诪爪注讬 讗转 砖诇砖转谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚:


And likewise, in the case of three villages that are arranged as a triangle, if there are only 141鈪 cubits separating between the two outer villages, the middle village combines the three villages into one.


讙诪壮 诪谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讗 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 诪拽讬专 讛注讬专 讜讞讜爪讛 讗诪专讛 转讜专讛 转谉 讞讜爪讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 诪讚讜讚:


GEMARA: The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that a karpef is added to a city, derived? Rava said: As the verse states: 鈥淎nd the open spaces of the cities, that you shall give to the Levites, shall be from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits around. And you shall measure from outside the city on the east side two thousand cubits鈥 (Numbers 35:4鈥5). The Torah says: Provide a certain vacant space outside the city, and only afterward measure the two thousand cubits.


讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讜讻讜壮: 讗讬转诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 谞讜转谞讬谉 拽专驻祝 诇讝讜 讜拽专驻祝 诇讝讜 讞讬讬讗 讘专 专讘 讗诪专 拽专驻祝 [讗讞讚] 诇砖转讬讛谉


We learned in the mishna: And the Rabbis say: They spoke of the addition of a karpef only with regard to the space between two adjacent cities. It was stated that the amora鈥檌m disagreed with regard to this issue. Rav Huna said: One allocates a karpef to this city and a karpef to that city, so that the two cities together are granted a total of slightly more than 141 cubits. 岣yya bar Rav said: One allocates only one common karpef to the two of them.


转谞谉 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专讜 拽专驻祝 讗诇讗 讘讬谉 砖转讬 注讬讬专讜转 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗


The Gemara raises possible proofs for each opinion. We learned in the mishna: And the Rabbis say: They spoke of the addition of a karpef only with regard to the space between two adjacent cities. This appears to be a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna, as it states that one karpef is allocated rather than two.


讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪讗讬 拽专驻祝 转讜专转 拽专驻祝 讜诇注讜诇诐 拽专驻祝 诇讝讜 讜拽专驻祝 诇讝讜


The Gemara answers that Rav Huna could have said to you in response to this difficulty: What is meant here by a karpef ? It means the principle of a karpef. In actuality, one allocates a karpef to this city and a karpef to that city.


讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪住转讘专讗 诪讚拽转谞讬 住讬驻讗 讗诐 讬砖 诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 讜诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 注讜砖讛 拽专驻祝 诇砖转讬讛谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛


The Gemara comments: So, too, it is reasonable to explain the mishna in the following manner: From the fact that it teaches in the latter clause: If this city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on one side, and that city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on the adjacent side, and the two areas of seventy-plus cubits overlap, the karpef combines the two cities into one. This indicates that an area of seventy cubits and a remainder is added to each city. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this that this is the correct understanding of the mishna.


诇讬诪讗 转讬讛讜讬 转讬讜讘转讬讛 讚讞讬讬讗 讘专 专讘 讗诪专 诇讱 讞讬讬讗 讘专 专讘


The Gemara asks: Let us say that this mishna is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of 岣yya bar Rav, that two adjacent cities are granted only one karpef. The Gemara answers that 岣yya bar Rav could have said to you:


讛讗 诪谞讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗


In accordance with whose opinion is this clause of the mishna? It is the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who maintains that one allocates a karpef to each city.


讗讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讛讗 转谞讬 诇讬讛 专讬砖讗 谞讜转谞讬谉 拽专驻祝 诇注讬专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专


The Gemara continues to ask: If it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, didn鈥檛 we already learn in the first clause: One allocates a karpef to each city; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir? What need is there to mention Rabbi Meir鈥檚 opinion again?


爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 诪讛讛讬讗 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 讞讚 诇讞讚讗 讜讞讚 诇转专转讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚诇转专转讬 转专讬 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讛讜


The Gemara answers: It was necessary to mention his opinion again, as, if we had learned his opinion only from that first clause, I might have said that one allocates one karpef for one city and also one karpef for two cities. Therefore, the mishna teaches us that for two cities, one allocates two karpef areas.


讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讛讻讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讚讞讬拽讗 转砖诪讬砖转讬讬讛讜 讗讘诇 讛转诐 讚诇讗 讚讞讬拽讗 转砖诪讬砖转讬讬讛讜 讗讬诪讗 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗


And conversely, if the mishna had taught us this law only here, with regard to two cities, one might have said that only in that case is each city granted a separate karpef, because a smaller space between the two adjacent cities would be too crowded for the use of both cities. But there, with regard to one city, where the area of the city itself is not too crowded for the use of its residents, one might say that it is not given any karpef whatsoever. Therefore, it was necessary for the mishna to teach both clauses.


转谞谉 讜讻谉 砖诇砖讛 讻驻专讬诐 讛诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 讗诐 讬砖 讘讬谉 砖谞讬诐 讛讞讬爪讜谞讬诐 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讗诪讛 讜砖诇讬砖 注讜砖讛 讗诪爪注讬 讗转 砖诇砖转谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚 讟注诪讗 讚讗讬讻讗 讗诪爪注讬 讛讗 诇讬讻讗 讗诪爪注讬 诇讗 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗


The Gemara tries again to adduce proof from the mishna, in which we learned: And likewise, in the case of three villages that are aligned in a row, if there is only 141鈪 cubits separating between the two outer ones, the middle village combines the three villages into one. At this point the Gemara understands that the mishna here is dealing with three villages arranged in a straight line. Therefore, it makes the following inference: The reason that the three villages are considered as one is only because there is a middle village, but were there no middle village, they would not be considered as one. This appears to be a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna. According to Rav Huna, the two villages should be considered as one even without the middle village, due to the double karpef.


讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讗 讗转诪专 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗讬讚讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讗 诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 诪诪砖 讗诇讗 专讜讗讬谉 讻诇 砖讗讬诇讜 诪讟讬诇 讗诪爪注讬 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讜讬讛讬讜 诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 讜讗讬谉 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖 注砖讛 讗诪爪注讬 讗转 砖诇砖转谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚


The Gemara rejects this argument: Rav Huna could have said to you: Wasn鈥檛 it stated with regard to that mishna that Rabba said that Rav Idi said that Rabbi 岣nina said: It does not mean that the villages are actually aligned in a row of three villages in a straight line. Rather, even if the middle village is off to one side and the outer villages are more than two karpef lengths apart, we see their spacing and make the following assessment: Any case where, if the middle village were placed between the other two so that they were three villages aligned in a row, there would be only a distance of 141鈪 cubits between one and the other, then the middle village turns the three villages into one. According to this explanation, the mishna can be understood even as a support for the opinion of Rav Huna.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇讗讘讬讬 讻诪讛 讬讛讗 讘讬谉 讞讬爪讜谉 诇讗诪爪注讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛


With regard to this case, Rava said to Abaye: How much distance can there be between an outer village and the middle one, if the latter is still to combine the three villages into one? Abaye said to him: Two thousand cubits.


讜讛讗 讗转 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专转 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪住转讘专讗 讚讗诪专 讬讜转专 诪讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛


Rava replied: Wasn鈥檛 it you yourself who said: It is reasonable to rule in accordance with the opinion of Rava, son of Rabba bar Rav Huna, who said: The Shabbat limit of a bow-shaped city is measured from the imaginary bowstring stretched between the two ends of the city, even if the distance between the center of the string and the center of the bow is more than two thousand cubits. Why shouldn鈥檛 the three villages in this case be considered a single village also, even if they are separated by more than two thousand cubits?


讛讻讬 讛砖转讗 讛转诐 讗讬讻讗 讘转讬诐 讛讻讗 诇讬讻讗 讘转讬诐


Abaye rejected the comparison: How can you compare? There, in the case of the bow-shaped city, there are houses that combine the city into a single unit, whereas here, there are no houses linking the outer villages. Therefore, if two villages are separated by more than two thousand cubits, the measure of the Shabbat limit, they cannot be considered a single entity.


讜讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇讗讘讬讬 讻诪讛 讬讛讗 讘讬谉 讞讬爪讜谉 诇讞讬爪讜谉 讻诪讛 讬讛讗 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讱 诪讬谞讛 讻诇 砖讗讬诇讜 诪讻谞讬住 讗诪爪注讬 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讜讗讬谉 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖


And Rava said to Abaye: How much distance can there be between one outer village and the other outer village? Abaye expressed surprise at this question: How much distance can there be between them? What is the practical difference to you? Any case where, if the middle village were placed between them, there would be only a distance of 141鈪 cubits between one and the other, the middle village turns the three villages into one. Therefore, the critical detail is not the distance between the outer villages but the size of the middle village.


讜讗驻讬诇讜 讗专讘注转 讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 注讬专 讛注砖讜讬讛 讻拽砖转 讗诐 讬砖 讘讬谉 砖谞讬 专讗砖讬讛 驻讞讜转 诪讗专讘注转 讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛 诪讜讚讚讬谉 诇讛 诪谉 讛讬转专 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 诪讜讚讚讬谉 诇讛 诪谉 讛拽砖转


Rava continued his line of questioning: Is this true even if the distance between the two outer villages is four thousand cubits? Abaye said to him: Yes. Rava asked: Didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say the following with regard to a city shaped like a bow: If the distance between its two ends is less than four thousand cubits, one measures the Shabbat limit from the imaginary bowstring stretched between the two ends of the bow; and if not, one measures the Shabbat limit from the bow itself? This indicates that even if there is an uninterrupted string of houses linking the two ends of the city, if the two ends are separated by more than four thousand cubits, the distance is too great for it to be considered a single city.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 诇讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专 诪诇讬 讛讻讗 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专 诪诇讬


Abaye said to him: There, in the case of the bow-shaped city, there is no room to say: Fill it in, as there is nothing with which to fill in the empty space between the two ends of the city. However, here, in the case of the villages, there is room to say: Fill it in, as the middle village is seen as though it were projected between the two outer villages, and therefore all three combine into a single village.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 住驻专讗 诇专讘讗 讛专讬 讘谞讬 讗拽讬住讟驻讜谉 讚诪砖讞讬谞谉 诇讛讜 转讞讜诪讗 诪讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 讚讗专讚砖讬专 讜讘谞讬 转讞讜诪讗 讚讗专讚砖讬专 诪砖讞讬谞谉 诇讛讜 转讞讜诪讗 诪讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 讚讗拽讬住讟驻讜谉 讛讗 讗讬讻讗 讚讙诇转 讚诪驻住拽讗 讬转专 诪诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖


Rav Safra said to Rava: With regard to the people of the city of Akistefon, for whom we measure the Shabbat limit from the far end of the city of Ardeshir, and the people of Ardeshir, for whom we measure the Shabbat limit from the far end of Akistefon, as though the two settlements were a single city; isn鈥檛 there the Tigris River, which separates them by more than 141鈪 cubits? How can two cities that are separated by more than two karpef-lengths be considered a single entity?


谞驻拽 讗讞讜讬 诇讬讛 讛谞讱 讗讟诪讛转讗 讚砖讜专讗 讚诪讘诇注讬 讘讚讙诇转 讘砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐:


Rava went out and showed Rav Safra the foundations of a wall of one of the cities, which were submerged in the Tigris River at a distance of seventy cubits and a remainder from the other city. In other words, the two cities were in fact linked through the remnants of a wall submerged in the river.


诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 诪讜讚讚讬谉 讗诇讗 讘讞讘诇 砖诇 讞诪砖讬诐 讗诪讛 诇讗 驻讞讜转 讜诇讗 讬讜转专 讜诇讗 讬诪讚讜讚 讗诇讗 讻谞讙讚 诇讘讜


MISHNA: One may measure a Shabbat limit only with a rope fifty cubits long, no less and no more, as will be explained in the Gemara. And one may measure the limit only at the level of one鈥檚 heart, i.e., whoever comes to measure the limit must hold the rope next to his chest.


讛讬讛 诪讜讚讚 讜讛讙讬注 诇讙讬讗 讗讜 诇讙讚专 诪讘诇讬注讜 讜讞讜讝专 诇诪讚转讜 讛讙讬注 诇讛专 诪讘诇讬注讜 讜讞讜讝专 诇诪讚转讜


If one was measuring the limit and he reached a canyon or a fence, the height of the fence and the depth of the canyon are not counted toward the two thousand cubits; rather, he spans it and then resumes his measurement. Two people hold the two ends of the rope straight across the canyon or the fence, and the distance is measured as though the area were completely flat. If one reached a hill, he does not measure its height; rather, he spans the hill as if it were not there and then resumes his measurement,

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.

  • This month's learning聽is sponsored by Leah Goldford in loving memory of聽her grandmothers, Tzipporah bat Yechezkiel, Rivka Yoda Bat聽Dovide Tzvi, Bracha Bayla bat Beryl, her father-in-law, Chaim Gershon ben Tzvi Aryeh, her mother, Devorah Rivkah bat Tuvia Hacohen, her cousins, Avrum Baer ben Mordechai, and Sharon bat Yaakov.

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

Eruvin 52-58 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

This week we will complete the fourth chapter of Masechet Eruvin and begin the fifth.聽 We will learn about extending...
alon shvut women

Squaring off the City

Eruvin Daf 57 Figuring out the eruv, squaring off the sity and 3 cities next to each other. Teacher: Tamara...

Eruvin 57

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Eruvin 57

讚诇 讗专讘注 讚转讞讜诪讬谉 讜讗专讘注 讚拽专谞讜转 讻诪讛 讛讜讬 转诪谞讬讗


Subtract four million square cubits of the extended boundary for the area of the open space, which is a thousand cubits by a thousand cubits on each side, and an additional four million square cubits from the corners, a thousand cubits by a thousand cubits in each corner, which are connected to the open space. How much is the sum total? It is eight million square cubits.


转讬诇转讗 讛讜讜 诪讬 住讘专转 讘专讘讜注讗 拽讗诪专 讘注讬讙讜诇讗 拽讗诪专 讻诪讛 诪专讜讘注 讬转专 注诇 讛注讙讜诇 专讘讬注 讚诇 专讘讬注 驻砖讜 诇讛 砖讬转讗 讜砖讬转讗 诪注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注 专讬讘注讗 讛讜讬


The Gemara asks: According to this calculation, the eight million square cubits of open space are one-third of the total area of the extended boundary, which is twenty-four million square cubits. The Gemara answers as it answered above: Do you think that this halakha was stated with regard to a square city? It was stated with regard to a round city. How much larger is the area of a square than the area of a circle? It is one quarter of the area of the circle. Subtract one quarter from the eight million square cubits of open space, and six million square cubits are left; and six is precisely one quarter of twenty-four.


专讘讬谞讗 讗诪专 诪讗讬 专讘讬注 专讘讬注 讚转讞讜诪讬谉


Ravina said: What is the meaning of the statement that the open space is one quarter? It is one quarter of the boundary. This halakha was indeed stated with regard to a square city. However, there is open space only along the sides of the city but not at its corners. Accordingly, a city that is two thousand cubits by two thousand cubits has a total extended boundary of thirty-two million square cubits, of which eight million square cubits, two thousand cubits by one thousand cubits on each side, is open space. The open space is thus one quarter of the total.


专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪讗讬 专讘讬注 专讘讬注 讚拽专谞讜转


Rav Ashi said the opposite: What is the meaning of the statement that the open space is one quarter of the total extended boundary? One quarter of the corners. Open space is granted only in the corners, and not along the sides. Accordingly, the open space is one thousand cubits by a thousand cubits in each corner, for a total of four million square cubits. The total extended boundary in each corner is two thousand cubits by two thousand cubits, or four million square cubits per corner, which equals a grand total of sixteen million square cubits. Consequently, the open space is one quarter of the total extended boundary.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谞讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讛讗 住讘讬讘 讻转讬讘


Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Isn鈥檛 it written in the verse: 鈥淎nd the open spaces of the cities, that you shall give to the Levites, shall be from the wall of the city and outward one thousand cubits around鈥 (Numbers 35:4)? The verse indicates that the city is provided with open space on all sides and not merely at its corners


诪讗讬 住讘讬讘 住讘讬讘 讚拽专谞讜转 讚讗讬 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讙讘讬 注讜诇讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讝专拽讜 (讘谞讬 讗讛专谉) 讗转 讛讚诐 注诇 讛诪讝讘讞 住讘讬讘 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 住讘讬讘 诪诪砖 讗诇讗 诪讗讬 住讘讬讘 住讘讬讘 讚拽专谞讜转 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪讗讬 住讘讬讘 住讘讬讘 讚拽专谞讜转


Rav Ashi responded: What is the meaning of around? Around at the corners, i.e., an open space of this size is provided at each corner. As, if you do not say so, that the area of the corners is also called around, with regard to the burnt-offering, as it is written: 鈥淎nd they shall sprinkle the blood around upon the altar鈥 (Leviticus 1:5), here, too, will you say that the blood must be sprinkled literally 鈥渁round鈥 the altar on all sides? The blood is sprinkled only upon the corners of the altar. Rather, what is the meaning of around? Around the corners, i.e., the mitzva is to sprinkle the blood at the corners, and this is considered sprinkling blood 鈥渁round upon the altar.鈥 Here too, with regard to the open space of the cities of the Levites, what is the meaning of around? Around the corners.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讞讘讬讘讬 诪讞讜讝谞讗讛 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讛讗 讗讬讻讗 诪讜专砖讗 讚拽专谞转讗


The Gemara returns to its previous statement that the open space around a city of the Levites is one quarter of the total extended boundary when the city is round. It questions this statement based upon the mishna鈥檚 ruling that the boundaries of a city are always delineated as a square. Rav 岣vivi from Me岣za said to Rav Ashi: But aren鈥檛 there the protrusions of the corners? How can there be a thousand cubits of open space on each side; when the city is squared, the corners of the square protrude into the open space, thus reducing its area?


讘诪转讗 注讬讙讜诇转讗 讜讛讗 专讬讘注讜讛 讗讬诪讜专 讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讞讝讬谞谉 讻诪讗谉 讚诪专讘注讗 专讘讜注讬 讜讚讗讬 诪讬 诪专讘注谞讗


Rav Ashi replied: We are dealing with a circular city. Rav 岣vivi responded: But haven鈥檛 they squared the city? Rav Ashi responded: Say that we say the following: We view the city as if it were squared. Do we actually add houses and square it? Although for the purpose of calculating the extended boundary we view the city as a square, in actuality the uninhabited sections are part of the open space.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讞谞讬诇讗讬 诪讞讜讝谞讗讛 诇专讘 讗砖讬 诪讻讚讬 讻诪讛 诪专讜讘注 讬转专 注诇 讛注讙讜诇 专讘讬注 讛谞讬 转诪谞讬 诪讗讛 砖讬转 诪讗讛 讜砖讬转讬谉 讜砖讘注 谞讻讬 转讬诇转讗 讛讜讬


Rav 岣nilai from Me岣za said to Rav Ashi: Now, how much larger is the area of a square than the area of a circle? One quarter. Therefore, if we calculate how much area a circular city with a diameter of two thousand cubits gains when it is squared, does it add up to these eight hundred cubits mentioned above? The extra area added is only 667 minus one-third cubits.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘注讬讙讜诇讗 诪讙讜 专讘讜注 讗讘诇 讘讗诇讻住讜谞讗 讘注讬谞讗 讟驻讬 讚讗诪专 诪专 讻诇 讗诪转讗 讘专讬讘讜注 讗诪转讗 讜转专讬 讞讜诪砖讬 讘讗诇讻住讜谞讗:


Rav Ashi said to him: This statement applies only to a circle enclosed within a square, as the area of a circle is three-quarters the area of the square around it. However, with regard to the additional diagonal [alakhsona] space added in the corners of the square, more is required. As the Master said: Every cubit in the side of a square is one and two-fifths cubits in its diagonal. Based on this rule, the calculation is exact.


诪转谞讬壮 谞讜转谞讬谉 拽专驻祝 诇注讬专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专讜 拽专驻祝 讗诇讗 讘讬谉 砖转讬 注讬讬专讜转 讗诐 讬砖 诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 讜诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 注讜砖讛 拽专驻祝 讗转 砖转讬讛谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚


MISHNA: One allocates a karpef to every city, i.e., the measure of a karpef, which is slightly more than seventy cubits, is added to every city, and the two thousand cubits of the Shabbat limit are measured from there; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: They spoke of the addition of a karpef only with regard to the space between two adjacent cities. How so? If this city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on one side, and that city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on the adjacent side, and the two areas of seventy-plus cubits overlap, the karpef combines the two cities into one.


讜讻谉 砖诇砖讛 讻驻专讬诐 讛诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 讗诐 讬砖 讘讬谉 砖谞讬诐 讞讬爪讜谞讬诐 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖 注砖讛 讗诪爪注讬 讗转 砖诇砖转谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚:


And likewise, in the case of three villages that are arranged as a triangle, if there are only 141鈪 cubits separating between the two outer villages, the middle village combines the three villages into one.


讙诪壮 诪谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讗 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 诪拽讬专 讛注讬专 讜讞讜爪讛 讗诪专讛 转讜专讛 转谉 讞讜爪讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 诪讚讜讚:


GEMARA: The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that a karpef is added to a city, derived? Rava said: As the verse states: 鈥淎nd the open spaces of the cities, that you shall give to the Levites, shall be from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits around. And you shall measure from outside the city on the east side two thousand cubits鈥 (Numbers 35:4鈥5). The Torah says: Provide a certain vacant space outside the city, and only afterward measure the two thousand cubits.


讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讜讻讜壮: 讗讬转诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 谞讜转谞讬谉 拽专驻祝 诇讝讜 讜拽专驻祝 诇讝讜 讞讬讬讗 讘专 专讘 讗诪专 拽专驻祝 [讗讞讚] 诇砖转讬讛谉


We learned in the mishna: And the Rabbis say: They spoke of the addition of a karpef only with regard to the space between two adjacent cities. It was stated that the amora鈥檌m disagreed with regard to this issue. Rav Huna said: One allocates a karpef to this city and a karpef to that city, so that the two cities together are granted a total of slightly more than 141 cubits. 岣yya bar Rav said: One allocates only one common karpef to the two of them.


转谞谉 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专讜 拽专驻祝 讗诇讗 讘讬谉 砖转讬 注讬讬专讜转 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗


The Gemara raises possible proofs for each opinion. We learned in the mishna: And the Rabbis say: They spoke of the addition of a karpef only with regard to the space between two adjacent cities. This appears to be a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna, as it states that one karpef is allocated rather than two.


讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪讗讬 拽专驻祝 转讜专转 拽专驻祝 讜诇注讜诇诐 拽专驻祝 诇讝讜 讜拽专驻祝 诇讝讜


The Gemara answers that Rav Huna could have said to you in response to this difficulty: What is meant here by a karpef ? It means the principle of a karpef. In actuality, one allocates a karpef to this city and a karpef to that city.


讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪住转讘专讗 诪讚拽转谞讬 住讬驻讗 讗诐 讬砖 诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 讜诇讝讜 砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐 注讜砖讛 拽专驻祝 诇砖转讬讛谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛


The Gemara comments: So, too, it is reasonable to explain the mishna in the following manner: From the fact that it teaches in the latter clause: If this city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on one side, and that city has seventy cubits and a remainder vacant on the adjacent side, and the two areas of seventy-plus cubits overlap, the karpef combines the two cities into one. This indicates that an area of seventy cubits and a remainder is added to each city. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this that this is the correct understanding of the mishna.


诇讬诪讗 转讬讛讜讬 转讬讜讘转讬讛 讚讞讬讬讗 讘专 专讘 讗诪专 诇讱 讞讬讬讗 讘专 专讘


The Gemara asks: Let us say that this mishna is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of 岣yya bar Rav, that two adjacent cities are granted only one karpef. The Gemara answers that 岣yya bar Rav could have said to you:


讛讗 诪谞讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗


In accordance with whose opinion is this clause of the mishna? It is the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who maintains that one allocates a karpef to each city.


讗讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讛讗 转谞讬 诇讬讛 专讬砖讗 谞讜转谞讬谉 拽专驻祝 诇注讬专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专


The Gemara continues to ask: If it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, didn鈥檛 we already learn in the first clause: One allocates a karpef to each city; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir? What need is there to mention Rabbi Meir鈥檚 opinion again?


爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 诪讛讛讬讗 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 讞讚 诇讞讚讗 讜讞讚 诇转专转讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚诇转专转讬 转专讬 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讛讜


The Gemara answers: It was necessary to mention his opinion again, as, if we had learned his opinion only from that first clause, I might have said that one allocates one karpef for one city and also one karpef for two cities. Therefore, the mishna teaches us that for two cities, one allocates two karpef areas.


讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讛讻讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讚讞讬拽讗 转砖诪讬砖转讬讬讛讜 讗讘诇 讛转诐 讚诇讗 讚讞讬拽讗 转砖诪讬砖转讬讬讛讜 讗讬诪讗 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗


And conversely, if the mishna had taught us this law only here, with regard to two cities, one might have said that only in that case is each city granted a separate karpef, because a smaller space between the two adjacent cities would be too crowded for the use of both cities. But there, with regard to one city, where the area of the city itself is not too crowded for the use of its residents, one might say that it is not given any karpef whatsoever. Therefore, it was necessary for the mishna to teach both clauses.


转谞谉 讜讻谉 砖诇砖讛 讻驻专讬诐 讛诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 讗诐 讬砖 讘讬谉 砖谞讬诐 讛讞讬爪讜谞讬诐 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讗诪讛 讜砖诇讬砖 注讜砖讛 讗诪爪注讬 讗转 砖诇砖转谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚 讟注诪讗 讚讗讬讻讗 讗诪爪注讬 讛讗 诇讬讻讗 讗诪爪注讬 诇讗 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗


The Gemara tries again to adduce proof from the mishna, in which we learned: And likewise, in the case of three villages that are aligned in a row, if there is only 141鈪 cubits separating between the two outer ones, the middle village combines the three villages into one. At this point the Gemara understands that the mishna here is dealing with three villages arranged in a straight line. Therefore, it makes the following inference: The reason that the three villages are considered as one is only because there is a middle village, but were there no middle village, they would not be considered as one. This appears to be a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna. According to Rav Huna, the two villages should be considered as one even without the middle village, due to the double karpef.


讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讗 讗转诪专 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗讬讚讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讗 诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 诪诪砖 讗诇讗 专讜讗讬谉 讻诇 砖讗讬诇讜 诪讟讬诇 讗诪爪注讬 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讜讬讛讬讜 诪砖讜诇砖讬谉 讜讗讬谉 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖 注砖讛 讗诪爪注讬 讗转 砖诇砖转谉 诇讛讬讜转 讗讞讚


The Gemara rejects this argument: Rav Huna could have said to you: Wasn鈥檛 it stated with regard to that mishna that Rabba said that Rav Idi said that Rabbi 岣nina said: It does not mean that the villages are actually aligned in a row of three villages in a straight line. Rather, even if the middle village is off to one side and the outer villages are more than two karpef lengths apart, we see their spacing and make the following assessment: Any case where, if the middle village were placed between the other two so that they were three villages aligned in a row, there would be only a distance of 141鈪 cubits between one and the other, then the middle village turns the three villages into one. According to this explanation, the mishna can be understood even as a support for the opinion of Rav Huna.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇讗讘讬讬 讻诪讛 讬讛讗 讘讬谉 讞讬爪讜谉 诇讗诪爪注讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛


With regard to this case, Rava said to Abaye: How much distance can there be between an outer village and the middle one, if the latter is still to combine the three villages into one? Abaye said to him: Two thousand cubits.


讜讛讗 讗转 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专转 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪住转讘专讗 讚讗诪专 讬讜转专 诪讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛


Rava replied: Wasn鈥檛 it you yourself who said: It is reasonable to rule in accordance with the opinion of Rava, son of Rabba bar Rav Huna, who said: The Shabbat limit of a bow-shaped city is measured from the imaginary bowstring stretched between the two ends of the city, even if the distance between the center of the string and the center of the bow is more than two thousand cubits. Why shouldn鈥檛 the three villages in this case be considered a single village also, even if they are separated by more than two thousand cubits?


讛讻讬 讛砖转讗 讛转诐 讗讬讻讗 讘转讬诐 讛讻讗 诇讬讻讗 讘转讬诐


Abaye rejected the comparison: How can you compare? There, in the case of the bow-shaped city, there are houses that combine the city into a single unit, whereas here, there are no houses linking the outer villages. Therefore, if two villages are separated by more than two thousand cubits, the measure of the Shabbat limit, they cannot be considered a single entity.


讜讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇讗讘讬讬 讻诪讛 讬讛讗 讘讬谉 讞讬爪讜谉 诇讞讬爪讜谉 讻诪讛 讬讛讗 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讱 诪讬谞讛 讻诇 砖讗讬诇讜 诪讻谞讬住 讗诪爪注讬 讘讬谞讬讛谉 讜讗讬谉 讘讬谉 讝讛 诇讝讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖


And Rava said to Abaye: How much distance can there be between one outer village and the other outer village? Abaye expressed surprise at this question: How much distance can there be between them? What is the practical difference to you? Any case where, if the middle village were placed between them, there would be only a distance of 141鈪 cubits between one and the other, the middle village turns the three villages into one. Therefore, the critical detail is not the distance between the outer villages but the size of the middle village.


讜讗驻讬诇讜 讗专讘注转 讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 注讬专 讛注砖讜讬讛 讻拽砖转 讗诐 讬砖 讘讬谉 砖谞讬 专讗砖讬讛 驻讞讜转 诪讗专讘注转 讗诇驻讬诐 讗诪讛 诪讜讚讚讬谉 诇讛 诪谉 讛讬转专 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 诪讜讚讚讬谉 诇讛 诪谉 讛拽砖转


Rava continued his line of questioning: Is this true even if the distance between the two outer villages is four thousand cubits? Abaye said to him: Yes. Rava asked: Didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say the following with regard to a city shaped like a bow: If the distance between its two ends is less than four thousand cubits, one measures the Shabbat limit from the imaginary bowstring stretched between the two ends of the bow; and if not, one measures the Shabbat limit from the bow itself? This indicates that even if there is an uninterrupted string of houses linking the two ends of the city, if the two ends are separated by more than four thousand cubits, the distance is too great for it to be considered a single city.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 诇讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专 诪诇讬 讛讻讗 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专 诪诇讬


Abaye said to him: There, in the case of the bow-shaped city, there is no room to say: Fill it in, as there is nothing with which to fill in the empty space between the two ends of the city. However, here, in the case of the villages, there is room to say: Fill it in, as the middle village is seen as though it were projected between the two outer villages, and therefore all three combine into a single village.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 住驻专讗 诇专讘讗 讛专讬 讘谞讬 讗拽讬住讟驻讜谉 讚诪砖讞讬谞谉 诇讛讜 转讞讜诪讗 诪讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 讚讗专讚砖讬专 讜讘谞讬 转讞讜诪讗 讚讗专讚砖讬专 诪砖讞讬谞谉 诇讛讜 转讞讜诪讗 诪讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 讚讗拽讬住讟驻讜谉 讛讗 讗讬讻讗 讚讙诇转 讚诪驻住拽讗 讬转专 诪诪讗讛 讜讗专讘注讬诐 讜讗讞转 讜砖诇讬砖


Rav Safra said to Rava: With regard to the people of the city of Akistefon, for whom we measure the Shabbat limit from the far end of the city of Ardeshir, and the people of Ardeshir, for whom we measure the Shabbat limit from the far end of Akistefon, as though the two settlements were a single city; isn鈥檛 there the Tigris River, which separates them by more than 141鈪 cubits? How can two cities that are separated by more than two karpef-lengths be considered a single entity?


谞驻拽 讗讞讜讬 诇讬讛 讛谞讱 讗讟诪讛转讗 讚砖讜专讗 讚诪讘诇注讬 讘讚讙诇转 讘砖讘注讬诐 讗诪讛 讜砖讬专讬讬诐:


Rava went out and showed Rav Safra the foundations of a wall of one of the cities, which were submerged in the Tigris River at a distance of seventy cubits and a remainder from the other city. In other words, the two cities were in fact linked through the remnants of a wall submerged in the river.


诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 诪讜讚讚讬谉 讗诇讗 讘讞讘诇 砖诇 讞诪砖讬诐 讗诪讛 诇讗 驻讞讜转 讜诇讗 讬讜转专 讜诇讗 讬诪讚讜讚 讗诇讗 讻谞讙讚 诇讘讜


MISHNA: One may measure a Shabbat limit only with a rope fifty cubits long, no less and no more, as will be explained in the Gemara. And one may measure the limit only at the level of one鈥檚 heart, i.e., whoever comes to measure the limit must hold the rope next to his chest.


讛讬讛 诪讜讚讚 讜讛讙讬注 诇讙讬讗 讗讜 诇讙讚专 诪讘诇讬注讜 讜讞讜讝专 诇诪讚转讜 讛讙讬注 诇讛专 诪讘诇讬注讜 讜讞讜讝专 诇诪讚转讜


If one was measuring the limit and he reached a canyon or a fence, the height of the fence and the depth of the canyon are not counted toward the two thousand cubits; rather, he spans it and then resumes his measurement. Two people hold the two ends of the rope straight across the canyon or the fence, and the distance is measured as though the area were completely flat. If one reached a hill, he does not measure its height; rather, he spans the hill as if it were not there and then resumes his measurement,

Scroll To Top