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

Today's Daf Yomi

July 19, 2015 | 讙壮 讘讗讘 转砖注状讛

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Nedarim 56

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 诪讜转专 讘注诇讬讬讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 注诇讬讬讛 讘讻诇诇 讛讘讬转 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 注诇讬讬讛 诪讜转专 讘讘讬转

MISHNA: For one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, entry is permitted for him in the upper story of the house; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: An upper story is included in the house, and therefore, entry is prohibited there as well. However, for one who vows that an upper story is forbidden to him, entry is permitted in the house, as the ground floor is not included in the upper story.

讙诪壮 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讘讘讬转 诇专讘讜转 讗转 讛讬爪讬注 讘讘讬转 诇专讘讜转 讗转 讛注诇讬讬讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讚讗讬 专讘谞谉 讛讗诪专讬 专讘谞谉 注诇讬讬讛 讘讻诇诇 讛讘讬转 诇诪讛 诇讬 拽专讗 讘讘讬转 诇专讬讘讜讬讗

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught with regard to the halakhot of leprosy that in the verse 鈥渋t appears to me as it were a plague in the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:35), the term 鈥渋n the house鈥 comes to include the gallery, a half story above the ground floor, and 鈥渋n the house鈥 comes to include the upper story? Rav 岣sda said: The tanna is Rabbi Meir, as, if the tanna was the Rabbis, didn鈥檛 the Rabbis say that a second story is included in the house? Why then do I need the verse containing the phrase 鈥渋n the house鈥 to include the second story?

讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘谞谉 讘注讬讗 拽专讗 讚住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诪讬谞讗 讘讘讬转 讗专抓 讗讞讝转讻诐 讻转讬讘 讚诪讞讘专 讘讗专注讗 砖诪讬讛 讘讬转 注诇讬讬讛 讛讗 诇讗 诪讞讘专 讘讗专注讗

Abaye said: Even if you would say that the tanna is the Rabbis, they too require a verse to include the second story in this case, as it might enter your mind to say that since it is written: 鈥淚n a house of the land of your possession鈥 (Leviticus 14:34), only that which is attached to the ground has the status of a house but with regard to a second story, that is not attached to the ground. Even according to the Rabbis, the verse is necessary to prevent the conclusion that the legal status of a second story is not that of a house with regard to leprosy.

讻诪讗谉 讗讝诇讗 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞讬讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚注讜诇讗 讘讬转 讘讘讬转讬 讗谞讬 诪讜讻专 诇讱 诪专讗讛讜 注诇讬讬讛 讟注诪讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讬转 砖讘讘讬转讬 讗谞讬 诪讜讻专 诇讱 讗讘诇 讘讬转 住转诐 讗讬谞讜 诪专讗讛讜 注诇讬讬讛 诇讬诪讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 注诇讬讬讛 诪注讜诇讛 砖讘讘转讬诐

The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which Rav Huna bar 岣yya said in the name of Ulla? If the seller says to the buyer: A house in my house I am selling to you, he may show the buyer that he purchased the second story [aliyya]. The Gemara infers: The reason is that the seller said to him: A house in my house I am selling to you. However, if he sold him a house, unspecified, he may not show him a second story. Let us say that this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who states that the second story is not included in the house. The Gemara rejects this claim: Even if you would say that it is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, what is the meaning of the term aliyya in this context? It does not mean second story; it means the most outstanding of the houses. Rav Huna bar 岣yya said in the name of Ulla that when one says a house in my house, he must show him the most outstanding part of his house. However, if he sold him a house without specification, he may show him a second story.

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛诪讟讛 诪讜转专 讘讚专讙砖 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讚专讙砖 讘讻诇诇 诪讟讛 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讚专讙砖 诪讜转专 讘诪讟讛

MISHNA: For one who vows that a bed is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a dargash, which is not commonly called a bed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: A dargash is included in the category of a bed. Everyone agrees that for one who vows that a dargash is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a bed.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讚专讙砖 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 注专住讗 讚讙讚讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇注讜诇讗 讛讗 讚转谞谉 讻砖讛谉 诪讘专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讻诇 讛注诐 诪住讜讘讬谉 注诇 讛讗专抓 讜讛讜讗 诪讬住讘 注诇 讛讚专讙砖 讻讜诇讛 砖转讗 诇讗 讬转讬讘 注诇讛 讛讛讜讗 讬讜诪讗 讬转讬讘 注诇讛 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬谞讗 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗讘砖专 讜讬讬谉 讚讻讜诇讛 砖转讗 讗讬 讘注讬 讗讻讬诇 讜讗讬 讘注讬 诇讗 讗讻讬诇 讛讛讜讗 讬讜诪讗 讗谞谉 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讬讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is a dargash? Ulla said: It is a bed of good fortune, placed in the house as a fortuitous omen, and not designated for sleeping. The Rabbis said to Ulla: That which we learned in a mishna: When the people serve the king the meal of comfort after he buries a relative, all the people recline on the ground and the king reclines on a dargash during the meal. According to your explanation, during the entire year he does not sit on the bed; on that day of the funeral he sits on it? Ravina objects to the question of the Rabbis: This anomaly is just as it is with regard to meat and wine, as throughout the entire year if he wishes he eats them, and if he wishes he does not eat them; on that day of the funeral, we give him meat and wine in the meal of comfort.

讗诇讗 讛讗 拽砖讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讚专讙砖 诇讗 讛讬讛 讻讜驻讛讜 讗诇讗 讝讜拽驻讜 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 注专住讗 讚讙讚讗 讛讜讗 讜讛转谞讬讗 讛讻讜驻讛 讗转 诪讟转讜 诇讗 诪讟转讜 讘诇讘讚 讛讜讗 讻讜驻讛 讗诇讗 讻诇 诪讟讜转 砖讬砖 诇讜 讘转讜讱 讛讘讬转 讛讜讗 讻讜驻讛 讛讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗

Rather, this is difficult, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to the custom of overturning the beds in the house of a mourner: With regard to a dargash in his house, the mourner would not overturn it, but he merely stands it on its side. And if you say that a dargash is a bed of fortune, isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: A mourner who is required to overturn his bed is required to overturn not only his own bed, but to overturn all of the beds that he has inside his house, even those not used for sleeping. Why, then, is he not required to overturn the dargash? The Gemara rejects this contention: This is not difficult;

诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗诪讟讛 讛诪讬讜讞讚转 诇讻诇讬诐 讚转谞讬讗 讗诐 讛讬转讛 诪讟讛 讛诪讬讜讞讚转 诇讻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讻驻讜转讛

this is just as it is with regard to the case of a bed designated exclusively for vessels, as it is taught in a baraita: If the bed in a mourner鈥檚 house was a bed designated for vessels and not for sleeping, one need not overturn it. The same is true with regard to the bed of fortune. Since it is not for sleeping, one need not overturn it.

讗诇讗 讗讬 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 拽砖讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讚专讙砖 诪转讬专 拽专讘讬讟讬讜 讜讛讜讗 谞讜驻诇 诪讗诇讬讜 讜讗讬 讚专讙砖 注专住讗 讚讙讚讗 讛讜讗 拽专讘讬讟讬谉 诪讬 讗讬转 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘讬谉 讗诪专 砖讗讬诇转讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 诪专讘谞谉 讜专讘 转讞诇讬驻讗 讘专 诪注专讘讗 砖诪讬讛 讚讛讜讛 砖讻讬讞 讘砖讜拽讗 讚爪诇注讬 讜讗诪专 诇讬 诪讗讬 讚专讙砖 注专住讗 讚爪诇讗

Rather, if defining a dargash as a bed of fortune is difficult, this is difficult, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A mourner need not overturn a dargash; rather, he loosens the loops that connect the straps that support the bedding to the bedframe, and it collapses on its own. And if a dargash is a bed of fortune, does it have loops [karvitin]? When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: I asked one of the Sages about the meaning of dargash, and Rav Ta岣lifa, from the West, was his name, who frequented the tanners鈥 market. And he said to me: What is a dargash? It is a leather bed.

讗讬转诪专 讗讬讝讛讜 诪讟讛 讜讗讬讝讛讜 讚专讙砖 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诪讟讛 诪住专讙讬谉 讗讜转讛 注诇 讙讘讛 讚专讙砖 诪住专讙讬谉 讗讜转讜 诪讙讜驻讜 诪讬转讬讘讬 讻诇讬 注抓 诪讗讬诪转讬 诪拽讘诇讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 讛诪讟讛 讜讛注专讬住讛 诪砖讬砖讜驻诐 讘注讜专 讛讚讙 讜讗讬 诪讟讛 诪住转专讙转 注诇 讙讘讛 诇诪讛 诇讬 砖讬驻转 注讜专 讛讚讙

It was stated: Which is a bed and which is a dargash? Rabbi Yirmeya said: In a bed, one fastens the supporting straps over the bedframe; in a dargash, one fastens the straps through holes in the bedframe itself. The Gemara raises an objection from a mishna in tractate Kelim (16:1): With regard to wooden vessels, from when are they considered finished vessels and susceptible to ritual impurity? A bed and a crib are susceptible from when he smooths them with the skin of a fish. And the objection is: If in a bed the straps are fastened over the bedframe, why do I need smoothing with the skin of a fish? The wood of the bedframe is obscured from view.

讗诇讗 讛讗 讜讛讗 诪讙讜驻谉 诪讟讛 讗注讜诇讬 讜讗驻讜拽讬 讘讘讝讬谞讬 讚专讙砖 讗注讜诇讬 讜讗驻讜拽讬 讘讗讘拽转讗

Rather, with regard to both this, a bed, and that, a dargash, one fastens the straps through holes in the bedframes themselves, and the difference between them is: In a bed, the straps are inserted and extracted through holes in the bedframe; in a dargash, the straps are inserted and extracted through loops attached to the bedframe, as Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said that one loosens the loops and the bedding falls on its own.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讟讛 砖谞拽诇讬讟讬讛 讬讜爪讗讬谉 讝讜拽驻讛 讜讚讬讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar A岣 said that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: With regard to a bed whose two posts [nakliteha] protrude, rendering its overturning impossible, he stands it on its side, and that is sufficient for him. Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel with regard to the overturning of a dargash.

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛注讬专 诪讜转专 诇讬讻谞住 诇转讞讜诪讛 砖诇 注讬专 讜讗住讜专 诇讬讻谞住 诇注讬讘讜专讛 讗讘诇 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讗住讜专 诪谉 讛讗讙祝 讜诇驻谞讬诐

MISHNA: For one who vows that the city is forbidden to him, it is permitted to enter the Shabbat boundary of that city, the two-thousand-cubit area surrounding the city, and it is prohibited to enter its outskirts, the seventy-cubit area adjacent to the city. However, for one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to enter only from the doorstop and inward.

讙诪壮 诪谞诇谉 讚注讬讘讜专讗 讚诪转讗 讻诪转讗 讚诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讬讛讬 讘讛讬讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘讬专讬讞讜 讜讙讜壮 诪讗讬 讘讬专讬讞讜 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讘讬专讬讞讜 诪诪砖 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜讬专讬讞讜 住讙专转 讜诪住讙专转 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讘注讬讘讜专讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that the legal status of the outskirts of a city are like that of the city itself? Rabbi Yo岣nan said that it is as the verse states: 鈥淎nd it came to pass when Joshua was in Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked鈥 (Joshua 5:13). What is the meaning of 鈥渋n Jericho鈥? If we say that it means in Jericho proper, isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd Jericho was completely shut鈥 (Joshua 6:1)? Rather, learn from here that Joshua was in the outskirts of the city. And although he was in the outskirts, the verse states that he was in Jericho.

讗讬诪讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讘转讞讜诪讛 讛讗 讻转讬讘 讘转讞讜诪讛 讜诪讚转诐 诪讞讜抓 诇注讬专

The Gemara asks: Say that the legal status of one located even in the Shabbat boundary of a city is like that of one inside the town itself, and perhaps although Joshua was merely within the Shabbat boundary, the verse characterizes him as being in Jericho. The Gemara rejects this: Isn鈥檛 it written with regard to the boundary of a city: 鈥淎nd you shall measure outside the city鈥two thousand cubits鈥 (Numbers 35:5)? This indicates that the boundary of a city is considered outside the town and not part of the city itself.

讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讗讬谞讜 讗住讜专 讗诇讗 诪谉 讛讗讙祝 讜诇驻谞讬诐 讗讘诇 诪谉 讛讗讙祝 讜诇讞讜抓 诇讗 诪转讬讘 专讘 诪专讬 讜讬爪讗 讛讻讛谉 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讬讻讜诇 讬诇讱 诇讘讬转讜 讜讬住讙讬专 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讗诇 驻转讞 讛讘讬转 讗讬 讗诇 驻转讞 讛讘讬转 讬讻讜诇 讬注诪讜讚 转讞转 讛诪砖拽讜祝 讜讬住讙讬专 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 注讚 砖讬爪讗 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讻讜诇讜

搂 We learned in the mishna: For one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to enter only from the doorstop and inward. The Gemara infers: However, from the doorstop outward, no, it is permitted to enter. Rav Mari raised an objection based on a verse written with regard to leprosy: 鈥淎nd the priest shall go out from the house to the entrance of the house, and he shall quarantine the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:38). And the question was raised in the halakhic midrash: One might have thought that the priest may go to his house and quarantine the leprous house that he examined from there. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淭o the entrance of the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:38). If he may go only to the entrance of the house, one might have thought that he may stand beneath the lintel and quarantine the house from there. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淎nd the priest shall go out from the house,鈥 indicating that he may not quarantine the house until he goes out from the entire house.

讛讗 讻讬爪讚 注讜诪讚 讘爪讚 讛诪砖拽讜祝 讜讬住讙讬专 讜诪谞讬谉 砖讗诐 讛诇讱 诇讘讬转讜 讜讛住讙讬专 讗讜 砖注诪讚 转讞转 讛砖拽讜祝 讜讛住讙讬专 砖讛住讙讬专讜 诪讜住讙专 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讜讛住讙讬专 讗转 讛讘讬转 诪讻诇 诪拽讜诐 砖讗谞讬 讙讘讬 讘讬转 讚讻转讬讘 诪谉 讛讘讬转 注讚 砖讬爪讗 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讻讜诇讜

How so? Ab initio, the priest stands outside, alongside the door jamb, and quarantines the house. And from where is it derived that if he went to his house and quarantined the house, or stood beneath the lintel and quarantined the house, that his quarantine is an effective quarantine after the fact? The verse states: 鈥淎nd he shall quarantine the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:38), which means in any case. Apparently, the legal status of the area beneath the lintel is identical to the status inside the house, even if it is beyond the doorstop. The Gemara answers: It is different with regard to a leprous house, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the priest shall go out from the house,鈥 indicating that he cannot quarantine the house until he goes out from the entire house.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

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

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Nedarim 56

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Nedarim 56

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 诪讜转专 讘注诇讬讬讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 注诇讬讬讛 讘讻诇诇 讛讘讬转 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 注诇讬讬讛 诪讜转专 讘讘讬转

MISHNA: For one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, entry is permitted for him in the upper story of the house; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: An upper story is included in the house, and therefore, entry is prohibited there as well. However, for one who vows that an upper story is forbidden to him, entry is permitted in the house, as the ground floor is not included in the upper story.

讙诪壮 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讘讘讬转 诇专讘讜转 讗转 讛讬爪讬注 讘讘讬转 诇专讘讜转 讗转 讛注诇讬讬讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讚讗讬 专讘谞谉 讛讗诪专讬 专讘谞谉 注诇讬讬讛 讘讻诇诇 讛讘讬转 诇诪讛 诇讬 拽专讗 讘讘讬转 诇专讬讘讜讬讗

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught with regard to the halakhot of leprosy that in the verse 鈥渋t appears to me as it were a plague in the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:35), the term 鈥渋n the house鈥 comes to include the gallery, a half story above the ground floor, and 鈥渋n the house鈥 comes to include the upper story? Rav 岣sda said: The tanna is Rabbi Meir, as, if the tanna was the Rabbis, didn鈥檛 the Rabbis say that a second story is included in the house? Why then do I need the verse containing the phrase 鈥渋n the house鈥 to include the second story?

讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘谞谉 讘注讬讗 拽专讗 讚住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诪讬谞讗 讘讘讬转 讗专抓 讗讞讝转讻诐 讻转讬讘 讚诪讞讘专 讘讗专注讗 砖诪讬讛 讘讬转 注诇讬讬讛 讛讗 诇讗 诪讞讘专 讘讗专注讗

Abaye said: Even if you would say that the tanna is the Rabbis, they too require a verse to include the second story in this case, as it might enter your mind to say that since it is written: 鈥淚n a house of the land of your possession鈥 (Leviticus 14:34), only that which is attached to the ground has the status of a house but with regard to a second story, that is not attached to the ground. Even according to the Rabbis, the verse is necessary to prevent the conclusion that the legal status of a second story is not that of a house with regard to leprosy.

讻诪讗谉 讗讝诇讗 讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞讬讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚注讜诇讗 讘讬转 讘讘讬转讬 讗谞讬 诪讜讻专 诇讱 诪专讗讛讜 注诇讬讬讛 讟注诪讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讬转 砖讘讘讬转讬 讗谞讬 诪讜讻专 诇讱 讗讘诇 讘讬转 住转诐 讗讬谞讜 诪专讗讛讜 注诇讬讬讛 诇讬诪讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 注诇讬讬讛 诪注讜诇讛 砖讘讘转讬诐

The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which Rav Huna bar 岣yya said in the name of Ulla? If the seller says to the buyer: A house in my house I am selling to you, he may show the buyer that he purchased the second story [aliyya]. The Gemara infers: The reason is that the seller said to him: A house in my house I am selling to you. However, if he sold him a house, unspecified, he may not show him a second story. Let us say that this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who states that the second story is not included in the house. The Gemara rejects this claim: Even if you would say that it is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, what is the meaning of the term aliyya in this context? It does not mean second story; it means the most outstanding of the houses. Rav Huna bar 岣yya said in the name of Ulla that when one says a house in my house, he must show him the most outstanding part of his house. However, if he sold him a house without specification, he may show him a second story.

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛诪讟讛 诪讜转专 讘讚专讙砖 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讚专讙砖 讘讻诇诇 诪讟讛 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讚专讙砖 诪讜转专 讘诪讟讛

MISHNA: For one who vows that a bed is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a dargash, which is not commonly called a bed; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: A dargash is included in the category of a bed. Everyone agrees that for one who vows that a dargash is forbidden to him, it is permitted to lie in a bed.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讚专讙砖 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 注专住讗 讚讙讚讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇注讜诇讗 讛讗 讚转谞谉 讻砖讛谉 诪讘专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讻诇 讛注诐 诪住讜讘讬谉 注诇 讛讗专抓 讜讛讜讗 诪讬住讘 注诇 讛讚专讙砖 讻讜诇讛 砖转讗 诇讗 讬转讬讘 注诇讛 讛讛讜讗 讬讜诪讗 讬转讬讘 注诇讛 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬谞讗 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗讘砖专 讜讬讬谉 讚讻讜诇讛 砖转讗 讗讬 讘注讬 讗讻讬诇 讜讗讬 讘注讬 诇讗 讗讻讬诇 讛讛讜讗 讬讜诪讗 讗谞谉 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讬讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is a dargash? Ulla said: It is a bed of good fortune, placed in the house as a fortuitous omen, and not designated for sleeping. The Rabbis said to Ulla: That which we learned in a mishna: When the people serve the king the meal of comfort after he buries a relative, all the people recline on the ground and the king reclines on a dargash during the meal. According to your explanation, during the entire year he does not sit on the bed; on that day of the funeral he sits on it? Ravina objects to the question of the Rabbis: This anomaly is just as it is with regard to meat and wine, as throughout the entire year if he wishes he eats them, and if he wishes he does not eat them; on that day of the funeral, we give him meat and wine in the meal of comfort.

讗诇讗 讛讗 拽砖讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讚专讙砖 诇讗 讛讬讛 讻讜驻讛讜 讗诇讗 讝讜拽驻讜 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 注专住讗 讚讙讚讗 讛讜讗 讜讛转谞讬讗 讛讻讜驻讛 讗转 诪讟转讜 诇讗 诪讟转讜 讘诇讘讚 讛讜讗 讻讜驻讛 讗诇讗 讻诇 诪讟讜转 砖讬砖 诇讜 讘转讜讱 讛讘讬转 讛讜讗 讻讜驻讛 讛讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗

Rather, this is difficult, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to the custom of overturning the beds in the house of a mourner: With regard to a dargash in his house, the mourner would not overturn it, but he merely stands it on its side. And if you say that a dargash is a bed of fortune, isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: A mourner who is required to overturn his bed is required to overturn not only his own bed, but to overturn all of the beds that he has inside his house, even those not used for sleeping. Why, then, is he not required to overturn the dargash? The Gemara rejects this contention: This is not difficult;

诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗诪讟讛 讛诪讬讜讞讚转 诇讻诇讬诐 讚转谞讬讗 讗诐 讛讬转讛 诪讟讛 讛诪讬讜讞讚转 诇讻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讻驻讜转讛

this is just as it is with regard to the case of a bed designated exclusively for vessels, as it is taught in a baraita: If the bed in a mourner鈥檚 house was a bed designated for vessels and not for sleeping, one need not overturn it. The same is true with regard to the bed of fortune. Since it is not for sleeping, one need not overturn it.

讗诇讗 讗讬 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 拽砖讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讚专讙砖 诪转讬专 拽专讘讬讟讬讜 讜讛讜讗 谞讜驻诇 诪讗诇讬讜 讜讗讬 讚专讙砖 注专住讗 讚讙讚讗 讛讜讗 拽专讘讬讟讬谉 诪讬 讗讬转 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘讬谉 讗诪专 砖讗讬诇转讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 诪专讘谞谉 讜专讘 转讞诇讬驻讗 讘专 诪注专讘讗 砖诪讬讛 讚讛讜讛 砖讻讬讞 讘砖讜拽讗 讚爪诇注讬 讜讗诪专 诇讬 诪讗讬 讚专讙砖 注专住讗 讚爪诇讗

Rather, if defining a dargash as a bed of fortune is difficult, this is difficult, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A mourner need not overturn a dargash; rather, he loosens the loops that connect the straps that support the bedding to the bedframe, and it collapses on its own. And if a dargash is a bed of fortune, does it have loops [karvitin]? When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: I asked one of the Sages about the meaning of dargash, and Rav Ta岣lifa, from the West, was his name, who frequented the tanners鈥 market. And he said to me: What is a dargash? It is a leather bed.

讗讬转诪专 讗讬讝讛讜 诪讟讛 讜讗讬讝讛讜 讚专讙砖 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诪讟讛 诪住专讙讬谉 讗讜转讛 注诇 讙讘讛 讚专讙砖 诪住专讙讬谉 讗讜转讜 诪讙讜驻讜 诪讬转讬讘讬 讻诇讬 注抓 诪讗讬诪转讬 诪拽讘诇讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 讛诪讟讛 讜讛注专讬住讛 诪砖讬砖讜驻诐 讘注讜专 讛讚讙 讜讗讬 诪讟讛 诪住转专讙转 注诇 讙讘讛 诇诪讛 诇讬 砖讬驻转 注讜专 讛讚讙

It was stated: Which is a bed and which is a dargash? Rabbi Yirmeya said: In a bed, one fastens the supporting straps over the bedframe; in a dargash, one fastens the straps through holes in the bedframe itself. The Gemara raises an objection from a mishna in tractate Kelim (16:1): With regard to wooden vessels, from when are they considered finished vessels and susceptible to ritual impurity? A bed and a crib are susceptible from when he smooths them with the skin of a fish. And the objection is: If in a bed the straps are fastened over the bedframe, why do I need smoothing with the skin of a fish? The wood of the bedframe is obscured from view.

讗诇讗 讛讗 讜讛讗 诪讙讜驻谉 诪讟讛 讗注讜诇讬 讜讗驻讜拽讬 讘讘讝讬谞讬 讚专讙砖 讗注讜诇讬 讜讗驻讜拽讬 讘讗讘拽转讗

Rather, with regard to both this, a bed, and that, a dargash, one fastens the straps through holes in the bedframes themselves, and the difference between them is: In a bed, the straps are inserted and extracted through holes in the bedframe; in a dargash, the straps are inserted and extracted through loops attached to the bedframe, as Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said that one loosens the loops and the bedding falls on its own.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讟讛 砖谞拽诇讬讟讬讛 讬讜爪讗讬谉 讝讜拽驻讛 讜讚讬讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar A岣 said that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: With regard to a bed whose two posts [nakliteha] protrude, rendering its overturning impossible, he stands it on its side, and that is sufficient for him. Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel with regard to the overturning of a dargash.

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛注讬专 诪讜转专 诇讬讻谞住 诇转讞讜诪讛 砖诇 注讬专 讜讗住讜专 诇讬讻谞住 诇注讬讘讜专讛 讗讘诇 讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讗住讜专 诪谉 讛讗讙祝 讜诇驻谞讬诐

MISHNA: For one who vows that the city is forbidden to him, it is permitted to enter the Shabbat boundary of that city, the two-thousand-cubit area surrounding the city, and it is prohibited to enter its outskirts, the seventy-cubit area adjacent to the city. However, for one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to enter only from the doorstop and inward.

讙诪壮 诪谞诇谉 讚注讬讘讜专讗 讚诪转讗 讻诪转讗 讚诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讬讛讬 讘讛讬讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘讬专讬讞讜 讜讙讜壮 诪讗讬 讘讬专讬讞讜 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讘讬专讬讞讜 诪诪砖 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜讬专讬讞讜 住讙专转 讜诪住讙专转 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讘注讬讘讜专讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that the legal status of the outskirts of a city are like that of the city itself? Rabbi Yo岣nan said that it is as the verse states: 鈥淎nd it came to pass when Joshua was in Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked鈥 (Joshua 5:13). What is the meaning of 鈥渋n Jericho鈥? If we say that it means in Jericho proper, isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd Jericho was completely shut鈥 (Joshua 6:1)? Rather, learn from here that Joshua was in the outskirts of the city. And although he was in the outskirts, the verse states that he was in Jericho.

讗讬诪讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讘转讞讜诪讛 讛讗 讻转讬讘 讘转讞讜诪讛 讜诪讚转诐 诪讞讜抓 诇注讬专

The Gemara asks: Say that the legal status of one located even in the Shabbat boundary of a city is like that of one inside the town itself, and perhaps although Joshua was merely within the Shabbat boundary, the verse characterizes him as being in Jericho. The Gemara rejects this: Isn鈥檛 it written with regard to the boundary of a city: 鈥淎nd you shall measure outside the city鈥two thousand cubits鈥 (Numbers 35:5)? This indicates that the boundary of a city is considered outside the town and not part of the city itself.

讛谞讜讚专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讗讬谞讜 讗住讜专 讗诇讗 诪谉 讛讗讙祝 讜诇驻谞讬诐 讗讘诇 诪谉 讛讗讙祝 讜诇讞讜抓 诇讗 诪转讬讘 专讘 诪专讬 讜讬爪讗 讛讻讛谉 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讬讻讜诇 讬诇讱 诇讘讬转讜 讜讬住讙讬专 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讗诇 驻转讞 讛讘讬转 讗讬 讗诇 驻转讞 讛讘讬转 讬讻讜诇 讬注诪讜讚 转讞转 讛诪砖拽讜祝 讜讬住讙讬专 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 诪谉 讛讘讬转 注讚 砖讬爪讗 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讻讜诇讜

搂 We learned in the mishna: For one who vows that a house is forbidden to him, it is prohibited to enter only from the doorstop and inward. The Gemara infers: However, from the doorstop outward, no, it is permitted to enter. Rav Mari raised an objection based on a verse written with regard to leprosy: 鈥淎nd the priest shall go out from the house to the entrance of the house, and he shall quarantine the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:38). And the question was raised in the halakhic midrash: One might have thought that the priest may go to his house and quarantine the leprous house that he examined from there. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淭o the entrance of the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:38). If he may go only to the entrance of the house, one might have thought that he may stand beneath the lintel and quarantine the house from there. Therefore, the verse states: 鈥淎nd the priest shall go out from the house,鈥 indicating that he may not quarantine the house until he goes out from the entire house.

讛讗 讻讬爪讚 注讜诪讚 讘爪讚 讛诪砖拽讜祝 讜讬住讙讬专 讜诪谞讬谉 砖讗诐 讛诇讱 诇讘讬转讜 讜讛住讙讬专 讗讜 砖注诪讚 转讞转 讛砖拽讜祝 讜讛住讙讬专 砖讛住讙讬专讜 诪讜住讙专 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讜讛住讙讬专 讗转 讛讘讬转 诪讻诇 诪拽讜诐 砖讗谞讬 讙讘讬 讘讬转 讚讻转讬讘 诪谉 讛讘讬转 注讚 砖讬爪讗 诪谉 讛讘讬转 讻讜诇讜

How so? Ab initio, the priest stands outside, alongside the door jamb, and quarantines the house. And from where is it derived that if he went to his house and quarantined the house, or stood beneath the lintel and quarantined the house, that his quarantine is an effective quarantine after the fact? The verse states: 鈥淎nd he shall quarantine the house鈥 (Leviticus 14:38), which means in any case. Apparently, the legal status of the area beneath the lintel is identical to the status inside the house, even if it is beyond the doorstop. The Gemara answers: It is different with regard to a leprous house, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the priest shall go out from the house,鈥 indicating that he cannot quarantine the house until he goes out from the entire house.

Scroll To Top