Eruvin 28bעירובין כ״ח ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Eruvin 28b"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
28bכ״ח ב

בדגנונייתא

he was referring to the garden variety, which is commonly eaten.

זרע גרגיר למאי חזי אמר רבי יוחנן שכן ראשונים שלא היה להן פלפלין שוחקין אותו ומטבילין בו את הצלי

Having mentioned arugula seeds, the Gemara asks: For what are they suitable? Generally, only the plant’s leaves are eaten. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The earlier generations, who had no pepper, would crush these seeds and dip their roasted meat in them. Therefore, arugula seeds are also eaten, even though this is not their typical use.

רבי זירא כי הוה חליש מגרסיה הוה אזיל ויתיב אפיתחא דרב יהודה בר אמי אמר כי נפקי ועיילי רבנן איקום מקמייהו ואקבל בהו אגרא

The Gemara relates that when Rabbi Zeira was exhausted from his studies, he would go and sit at the entrance to the academy of Rav Yehuda bar Ami, and say: When the Sages go in and out, I shall stand up before them and receive reward for honoring them, as it is a mitzva to honor Torah scholars. Too tired to engage in actual Torah study, he sought a way to rest while fulfilling a different mitzva at the same time.

נפק אתא ינוקא דבי רב אמר ליה מאי אגמרך רבך אמר ליה כשות בורא פרי האדמה חזיז שהכל נהיה בדברו אמר ליה אדרבה איפכא מיסתברא האי מארעא קא מרבי והאי מאוירא קא מרבי

Once, a young school child was leaving the study hall. Rabbi Zeira said to him: What did your teacher teach you today? He said to him: The proper blessing for dodder is: Who creates the fruit of the ground; the proper blessing for green grain is: By Whose word all things came to be. Rabbi Zeira said to him: On the contrary, the opposite is more reasonable, as this, the green grain, derives nourishment from the ground, whereas that, the dodder, derives nourishment from the air, and it is fitting to recite a blessing over each item in accordance with its source of nourishment.

והלכתא כינוקא דבי רב מאי טעמא האי גמר פירי והאי לאו גמר פירי ומאי דקאמרת האי מארעא קא רבי והאי מאוירא קא רבי לא היא כשות נמי מארעא קא רבי דהא קא חזינן דקטלינן לה להיזמתא ומייתא כשותא

The Gemara concludes: The halakha is in accordance with the young school child. What is the reason for this? This, the dodder, is fully ripened produce, and that, green grain, is not fully ripened produce. If produce is not fully ripened one can only recite the blessing: By Whose word all things came to be. And that which you said: This, the green grain, derives nourishment from the ground, whereas that, the dodder, derives nourishment from the air, this is not so. Dodder also derives nourishment from the ground, for we see that when the prickly shrub is cut off, the dodder attached to it dies. This shows that dodder also derives its nourishment from the ground, albeit indirectly.

ובכפניות אין מערבין והתניא קור ניקח בכסף מעשר ואין מטמא טומאת אוכלין וכפניות נקחות בכסף מעשר ומטמאות טומאת אוכלים

The Gemara now considers the next part of Rav’s statement: And is it correct that one may not establish an eiruv with unripe dates? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: Heart of palm, the soft, edible inner core of a palm tree, may be bought with second-tithe money; but it does not contract the ritual impurity of foods, as it is not actually a food, but rather a part of the tree itself. And unripe dates may be bought with second-tithe money, and they even contract the ritual impurity of foods.

רבי יהודה אומר קור הרי הוא כעץ לכל דבריו אלא שניקח בכסף מעשר וכפניות הרי הן כפרי לכל דבריהם אלא שפטורות מן המעשר

Rabbi Yehuda says this somewhat differently: Heart of palm is like a tree in all its legal aspects, except that it may be bought with second-tithe money, as it is edible. And unripe dates are like fruit in all regards, as they are actual fruit, except with respect to one characteristic, which is that they are exempt from tithes because they are not yet fully ripened.

התם בדניסחני

The Gemara answers: There, the baraita is referring to the fruit of palms that never fully ripen. They are therefore regarded as full-fledged fruit even in their unripe state. Rav, however, was referring to the fruit of palms, which eventually ripen. Their unripe state is merely a transitional stage in their development.

אי הכי בהא לימא רבי יהודה פטורות מן המעשר והתניא אמר רבי יהודה לא הוזכרו פגי ביתיוני אלא לענין מעשר בלבד פגי ביתיוני ואהיני דטובינא חייבין במעשר

The Gemara asks: If so, would Rabbi Yehuda say with regard to this that they are exempt from tithes? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda said: The unripe figs of the place called Beityoni were only mentioned with regard to tithes, as it was stated: In the case of the unripe figs of Beityoni, and the unripe dates of the place called Tuvina, one is obligated to tithe them even though they never ripen, since they are considered full-fledged fruit in all respects?

אלא לעולם לאו בניסחני ולענין טומאת אוכלין שאני כדאמר רבי יוחנן הואיל וראוי למתקן על ידי האור הכא נמי הואיל ויכול למתקן על ידי האור

Rather, say as follows: Actually, the baraita is not referring to the fruit of palms that never fully ripen, but rather to the fruit of palms that eventually ripen. However, the halakha pertaining to the ritual impurity of foods is different, and an item’s status as a food with regard to the impurity of foods cannot be brought as proof of its status as a food with regard to an eiruv. As Rabbi Yoḥanan said elsewhere: Since they are fit to be sweetened through cooking with fire, they are regarded as food for the purpose of tithes; here too, we can say: Since they are fit to be sweetened through cooking with fire, unripe dates are fit to contract the impurity of foods. However, with regard to an eiruv, we require food that is ready for consumption, and something that can be prepared to become food is not sufficient.

והיכא אתמר דרבי יוחנן אהא דתניא שקדים המרים קטנים חייבין גדולים פטורין מתוקים גדולים חייבין קטנים פטורין רבי שמעון ברבי יוסי אומר משום אביו זה וזה לפטור ואמרי לה זה וזה לחיוב אמר רבי אילעא הורה רבי חנינא בציפורי כדברי האומר זה וזה לפטור

The Gemara asks: Where was this comment of Rabbi Yoḥanan originally stated? The Gemara answers: It was stated on this ruling, which was taught in a baraita: One is obligated to tithe bitter almonds while they are still small and green, as they are fit to be eaten while still undeveloped. When they are large, however, one is exempt from tithing them, as they are no longer edible. One is obligated to tithe sweet, large almonds, whereas one is exempt from tithing small ones, as they have not yet fully ripened. Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yosei, said in the name of his father: One is exempt from tithing both this and that, large and small bitter almonds. And some say that he said in the name of his father: One is obligated to tithe both this and that. Rabbi Ila said: Rabbi Ḥanina ruled in Tzippori in accordance with the one who said: One is exempt from tithing both this and that.

ולמאן דאמר זה וזה לחיוב למאי חזי אמר רבי יוחנן הואיל וראוי למתקן על ידי האור

The Gemara asks: According to the view of the one who said one is obligated to tithe both this and that, for what are large, bitter almonds suitable? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Since these almonds are fit to be sweetened and made edible through cooking with fire, they are regarded as food for the purpose of tithes.

אמר מר רבי יהודה אומר קור הרי הוא כעץ לכל דבריו אלא שניקח בכסף מעשר היינו תנא קמא

The Gemara further examines the baraita cited earlier. The Master said that Rabbi Yehuda says: Heart of palm is like a tree in all its legal aspects, except that it may be bought with second-tithe money. The Gemara asks: Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is identical to that of the first tanna.

אמר אביי שלקו וטגנו איכא בינייהו

Abaye said: There is a practical difference between them in a case where one boiled or fried the heart of palm. According to Rabbi Yehuda, it does not contract the ritual impurity of foods even if it was boiled or fried, whereas the first tanna holds that in that case it does contract impurity.

מתקיף לה רבא מי איכא למאן דאמר שלקו וטגנו לא והתניא העור והשיליא אין מטמאין טומאת אוכלין עור ששלקו ושיליא שחישב עליה מטמאין טומאת אוכלין

Rava strongly objects to this: Is there really anyone who said that even if one boiled or fried it, it does not contract the ritual impurity of foods? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: The hide and the placenta of an animal, which people do not typically eat, do not contract the ritual impurity of foods; however, a hide that one boiled until it became edible and a placenta that one intended to eat do contract the impurity of foods? This indicates that even something not originally fit to be eaten contracts the impurity of foods once it has been boiled or fried, and the same should apply to heart of palm according to all opinions.

אלא אמר רבא איכא בינייהו ברכה דאתמר קור רב יהודה אמר בורא פרי האדמה ושמואל אמר שהכל נהיה בדברו

Rather, Rava said: There is a practical difference between them with regard to the blessing that must be recited prior to eating, for it was stated that the amora’im disagreed about the blessing recited over heart of palm: Rav Yehuda said the appropriate blessing is: Who creates the fruit of the ground. And Shmuel said the appropriate blessing is: By Whose word all things came to be.

רב יהודה אמר בורא פרי האדמה אוכלא הוא ושמואל אמר שהכל נהיה בדברו כיון שסופו להקשות לא מברכינן עילויה בורא פרי האדמה

The Gemara explains the two opinions: Rav Yehuda said the appropriate blessing is: Who creates the fruit of the ground, as it is food. Since heart of palm is edible it is called a fruit, and we recite a blessing over it in the manner of all fruits. And Shmuel said the appropriate blessing is: By Whose word all things came to be. Since it will eventually harden and become like an inedible tree, we do not recite over it the blessing: Who creates the fruit of the ground, as it will eventually lose the status of a fruit.

אמר ליה שמואל לרב יהודה שיננא כוותיך מסתברא דהא צנון שסופו להקשות ומברכינן עליה בורא פרי האדמה

Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Shinnana, your opinion is reasonable, as a radish will eventually harden, and yet we recite over it the blessing: Who creates the fruit of the ground.

ולא היא צנון נטעי אינשי אדעתא דפוגלא דיקלא לא נטעי אינשי אדעתא דקורא ואף על גב דקלסיה שמואל לרב יהודה הלכתא כוותיה דשמואל:

The Gemara comments: But it is not so, because people plant radish with the intention of eating it while it is soft; but people do not plant palm trees with the intention of eating heart of palm. Therefore, heart of palm is not considered the fruit of the palm, but rather food extracted from it, over which only the following blessing should be recited: By Whose word all things came to be. And the Gemara concludes: Even though Shmuel praised Rav Yehuda, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel.

גופא אמר רב יהודה אמר רב כשות וחזיז מערבין בהן ומברכין עליהם בורא פרי האדמה כשות בכמה כדאמר רב יחיאל כמלא היד הכא נמי כמלא היד

The Gemara now examines the matter itself cited in the previous discussion in the name of Rav. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said with regard to dodder and green grain: One may establish an eiruv with them, and when eating them one recites the blessing: Who creates the fruit of the ground. The Gemara asks: How much dodder must be used to establish an eiruv? The Gemara answers: As Rav Yeḥiel said with regard to a similar issue: A handful. Here, too, the measure is a handful.

חזיז בכמה אמר רבה בר טוביה בר יצחק אמר רב כמלא אוזילתא דאיכרי

Similarly, how much green grain is needed to establish an eiruv? Rabba bar Toviya bar Yitzḥak said that Rav said: A full farmers’ bundle.

אמר רב חלקיה בר טוביה מערבין בקליא בקליא סלקא דעתך אלא בירקא דקליא וכמה אמר רב יחיאל כמלא היד

Rav Ḥilkiya bar Toviya said: One may establish an eiruv with glasswort. The Gemara expresses astonishment: Does it enter your mind that one may establish an eiruv with glasswort? People do not eat glasswort. Rather, one may establish an eiruv with the herb from whose ashes glasswort is prepared, as it is fit for human consumption before it is burnt. And how much of it is needed to establish an eiruv? Rav Yeḥiel said: A handful.

רבי ירמיה נפק לקירייתא בעו מיניה מהו לערב בפולין לחין לא הוה בידיה כי אתא לבי מדרשא אמרו ליה הכי אמר רבי ינאי מערבין בפולין לחין וכמה אמר רב יחיאל כמלא היד

The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yirmeya once went out to visit certain villages, and the villagers asked him: What is the halakha with regard to establishing an eiruv with moist beans? He did not have an answer for them. When he came to the study hall, they said to him: This is what Rabbi Yannai said: One may establish an eiruv with moist beans. And how much is needed for that purpose? Rav Yeḥiel said: A handful.

אמר רב המנונא מערבין בתרדין חיין איני והאמר רב חסדא סילקא חייא קטיל גברא חייא

Rav Hamnuna said: One may also establish an eiruv with raw beets. The Gemara raises a difficulty: Is that so? Didn’t Rav Ḥisda say: Raw beet kills a healthy person, which indicates that beets are unhealthy and should therefore be unfit for establishing an eiruv?