Eruvin 16a:5עירובין ט״ז א:ה
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Eruvin 16a:5'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
16aט״ז א

בעביטין בשליפין בקנים בקולחות מטלטלין בתוכה ובלבד שלא יהא בין גמל לגמל כמלא גמל ובין אוכף לאוכף כמלא אוכף ובין עביט לעביט כמלא עביט

or with saddle cushions [avitin], or with wheat sheaves, or with boards, or with stalks [kolaḥot], one may carry within the enclosed area, provided that there is no camel-length gap between one camel and another, or a saddle-length gap between one saddle and another, or a cushion-length gap between one cushion and another. Apparently, from this baraita it can be understood that if the breach is equal to the standing segment, it is not a valid enclosure.

הכא נמי כשנכנס ויוצא

The Gemara rejects this conclusion. Here, too, it is referring to gaps through which the various objects can easily be inserted and extracted, so that the breached segment is in fact slightly greater than that of the standing segment.

תא שמע נמצאת אתה אומר שלש מדות במחיצות כל שהוא פחות משלשה צריך שלא יהא בין זה לזה שלשה כדי שלא יזדקר הגדי בבת ראש

The Gemara cites yet another proof: Come and hear that which was taught in the Tosefta in tractate Kilayim: Ultimately, you say that there are three measures for partitions. These partitions form a barrier that demarcates between vines and seeds. They are needed to render permitted the sowing of a field with diverse kinds of seeds. In the case of any partition consisting of boards that are each less than three handbreadths wide, it is necessary that there will not be a gap of three handbreadths between this board and that, so that a goat would not be able to leap headlong through it unimpeded. If the gap is wider than three handbreadths, i.e., wide enough that a goat can leap through it, the boards are not considered joined and it is not considered a partition.

כל שהוא שלשה ומשלשה עד ארבעה צריך שלא יהא בין זה לזה כמלואו כדי שלא יהא פרוץ כעומד ואם היה פרוץ מרובה על העומד אף כנגד העומד אסור

In the case of any partition that consists of boards that are three handbreadths wide, as well as boards from three to four handbreadths wide, the gap between the boards may be greater than three handbreadths. Nonetheless, it is necessary that there will not be a gap equal to the full width of a board between one board and the next, so that the breached segment will not equal the standing segment. And if the breached segment is greater than the standing segment, it is prohibited to sow another species, even in the area opposite the standing segment, as the breached segment invalidates the entire partition.

כל שהוא ארבעה ומארבעה עד עשר אמות צריך שלא יהא בין זה לזה כמלואו שלא יהא פרוץ כעומד ואם היה פרוץ כעומד כנגד העומד מותר כנגד הפרוץ אסור ואם היה עומד מרובה על הפרוץ אף כנגד הפרוץ מותר

With regard to any partition that consists of boards that are four handbreadths wide, as well as boards from four handbreadths to ten cubits wide, it is necessary that there not be a gap the full width of a board between one board and the next, so that the breached segment will not equal the standing segment. And if the breached segment equals the standing segment, then in the area opposite the standing segment, it is permitted to sow other species, as there is a partition there; however, in the area facing the breached segment it is prohibited. And if the sum of the standing segments is greater than the sum of the breached segments, sowing other species is permitted, even in the area opposite the breached part.

נפרצה ביותר מעשר אסור היו שם קנים הדוקרנים ועושה להן פיאה מלמעלה אפילו ביותר מעשר מותר

However, if, the partition was breached more than ten cubits, sowing diverse kinds is prohibited, as a breach of more than ten cubits invalidates the entire partition. But if there were pronged stakes stuck in the ground there, and one made them a braid [pe’a] of straw above them in the form of a doorway, even if the stakes were set more than ten cubits apart, sowing is permitted. The form of a doorway renders the partition valid, even if there is a breach wider than ten cubits.

קתני מיהת רישא משלשה עד ארבעה ובלבד שלא יהא בין זה לזה כמלואו תיובתא דרב פפא

The Gemara explains how the passage from the Tosefta of tractate Kilayim supports the opinion of Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, contrary to that of Rav Pappa. In any case, the first clause of the Tosefta teaches that if each of the boards that make up the partition is from three to four handbreadths wide, sowing other species is permitted, provided that there is not a gap the full width of a board between one board and the next. This is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Pappa, who permits carrying when the breach equals the standing segment of the partition.

אמר לך רב פפא מאי מלואו נכנס ויוצא

Rav Pappa could have said to you: What does the baraita mean by a gap the full width of a board? It means a gap through which the board could easily be inserted and extracted, which is a gap slightly wider than the board itself.

הכי נמי מסתברא מדקתני אם היה פרוץ מרובה על העומד אף כנגד העומד אסור הא כעומד מותר שמע מינה

The Gemara comments: So too, it stands to reason, from the fact that the Tosefta teaches later: If the breached segment is greater than the standing segment, it is prohibited to sow another species, even in the area opposite the standing portion. By inference, if the breached segment equals the standing segment, sowing other species is in fact permitted. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from here proof for the opinion of Rav Pappa.

לימא תיהוי תיובתיה דרב הונא בריה דרב יהושע אמר לך וליטעמיך אימא סיפא אם היה עומד מרובה על הפרוץ אף כנגד הפרוץ מותר הא כפרוץ אסור

The Gemara asks: Let us say that this conclusion is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua. The Gemara rejects this: Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, could have said to you: And according to your reasoning, say the latter clause of the Tosefta as follows: If the sum of the standing segment is greater than the sum of the breached segment, sowing other species is permitted even in the area opposite the breached segment. This clause indicates that if the breached segment equals the standing segment, sowing other species is prohibited.

סיפא קשיא לרב פפא רישא קשיא לרב הונא בריה דרב יהושע

The Gemara points out that that analysis of the baraita leads to the conclusion that the latter clause poses a difficulty for Rav Pappa’s opinion; the first clause poses a difficulty for the opinion of Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua.

סיפא לרב פפא לא קשיא איידי דתנא רישא פרוץ מרובה על העומד תנא סיפא עומד מרובה על הפרוץ

The Gemara answers: The latter clause poses no difficulty to Rav Pappa. Since the first clause taught the expression: If the sum of the breached segment is greater than the sum of the standing segment, the latter clause of the baraita taught the parallel expression: If the sum of the standing segment is greater than the sum of the breached segment, even though the latter formulation is imprecise, as the same halakha applies even if the two are equal.

רישא לרב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לא קשיא איידי דבעי למיתני סיפא עומד מרובה על הפרוץ תנא רישא פרוץ מרובה על העומד

Similarly, the Gemara explains that the first clause does not pose a difficulty to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua. Since the baraita sought to teach the expression in the latter clause: If the sum of the standing segments is greater than the sum of the breached segments, in the first clause taught the parallel expression : If the sum of the breached segments is greater than the sum of the standing segments, even though this formulation is imprecise, as the same halakha applies even if the two are equal.

בשלמא לרב פפא משום הכי לא עריב להו ותני להו

The Gemara continues: Granted, according to Rav Pappa, who permits carrying in the case where the breaches equal the standing segments, the baraita makes sense, as for that reason the tanna did not combine the case of boards less than three handbreadths wide with the case of boards three handbreadths wide and teach them in a single clause. According to Rav Pappa, there is a significant difference between the two situations. In a case where the boards are less than three handbreadths wide, the partition is invalid if there is a gap of three handbreadths between one bar and the next. However, if the boards are precisely three handbreadths wide, the partition is valid unless there is a gap of more than three handbreadths between them.

אלא לרב הונא בריה דרב יהושע ליערבינהו וליתננהו כל שהוא פחות משלשה ושלשה צריך שלא יהא בין זה לזה שלשה

However, according to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, who considers a partition invalid when its breached segments are equal to its standing segments, the baraita should have combined the case of boards less than three handbreadths wide with the case of boards exactly three handbreadths wide and taught them in the following single clause: Any partition made of boards less than three handbreadths wide or exactly three handbreadths wide, it is necessary that there not be a gap of three handbreadths between one board and another. According to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, if a partition with boards three handbreadths wide is to be valid, the gap must be less than three handbreadths.

משום דלא דמי פסולא דרישא לפסולא דסיפא פסולא דרישא כדי שלא יזדקר הגדי בבת אחת פסולא דסיפא שלא יהא פרוץ כעומד

The Gemara explains why the two cases were not combined according to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua. It is because the disqualification in the first clause is not similar to the disqualification in the latter clause. The reason for the disqualification in the first clause is because a valid partition must be constructed so that a goat would not be able to jump through the gap in one leap; the reason for the disqualification in the latter clause, where the boards are three handbreadths wide, is so that the breached segments will equal the combined standing segments. In practice, just as in the case of boards less than three handbreadths wide, the gap must be less than three handbreadths, so too, in the case of boards three handbreadths wide, the gap must also be less than three handbreadths. However, in terms of underlying reasoning, the case of boards three handbreadths wide must be categorized in the second grouping in the Tosefta, not the first. Therefore, no proof can be cited from here, neither in support of the opinion of Rav Pappa nor in support of the opinion of Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua.

פחות משלשה מני רבנן היא דאמרי פחות משלשה אמרינן לבוד שלשה לא אמרינן לבוד

The Gemara briefly discusses the ruling cited in the Tosefta that a breach of less than three handbreadths does not invalidate a partition. In accordance with whose opinion is that ruling? It is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who say: In the case of a gap less than three handbreadths, we say, i.e., we apply, the principle of lavud, and the partitions are considered joined; however, if the gap is three handbreadths, we do not say lavud.

אימא סיפא כל שהוא שלשה ומשלשה ועד ארבעה

Say the latter clause with regard to a partition of boards as follows: In the case of any partition whose boards are three handbreadths wide, and any partition whose boards are from three to four handbreadths wide,