Eruvin 63bעירובין ס״ג ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Eruvin 63b'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
63bס״ג ב

וכתיב נון בנו יהושע בנו

And it is written at the end of the list of the descendants of Ephraim: “Non his son, Joshua his son” (i Chronicles 7:27), which implies that Joshua himself had no children.

ופליגא דרבי אבא בר פפא דאמר רבי אבא בר פפא לא נענש יהושע אלא בשביל שביטל את ישראל לילה אחת מפריה ורביה

And this tradition differs from the following statement of Rabbi Abba bar Pappa, for Rabbi Abba bar Pappa said: Joshua was punished to remain childless only because he had prevented the Jewish people from fulfilling the commandment of being fruitful and multiplying for one night. Therefore, he was punished measure-for-measure by not having children himself.

שנאמר ויהי בהיות יהושע ביריחו וישא עיניו וירא וגו׳ וכתיב ויאמר (לו) כי אני שר צבא ה׳ עתה באתי וגו׳

As it is stated: “And it came to pass when Joshua was by Jericho that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, a man stood over against him with his sword drawn in his hand” (Joshua 5:13), and it is written further: “And he said: No, but I am captain of the host of the Lord, I am now come” (Joshua 5:14). The man, an angel, came to demand something of Joshua and to rebuke him.

אמר לו אמש ביטלתם תמיד של בין הערבים ועכשיו ביטלתם תלמוד תורה על איזה מהן באת אמר לו עתה באתי

The angel said to him: Last night, due to your preparations for war, you neglected the daily evening offering, and now, tonight, you are neglecting Torah study. Joshua asked him: For which of these sins have you come specially to reprove me? He said to him: “I am now come,” i.e., the fact that I did not come last night, but waited until now, shows that the sin of neglecting Torah study is the more severe one.

מיד וילך יהושע בלילה ההוא בתוך העמק ואמר רבי יוחנן מלמד שהלך בעומקה של הלכה

Joshua immediately acted to rectify the matter by deciding that he must devote more time to learning Torah, as it is stated: “And Joshua walked that night in the midst of the valley [ha’emek]” (Joshua 8:13). And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This teaches that he walked all night in the depth [be’omeka] of halakha, thereby atoning for his previous neglect of Torah study.

וגמירי דכל זמן שארון ושכינה שרויין שלא במקומן אסורין בתשמיש המטה

And they learned as a tradition that any time that the Ark and the Divine Presence are not resting in their proper places, the entire Jewish people are prohibited from engaging in marital relations. Owing to the nation’s preoccupation with war, the Ark was not restored to its rightful place in the Tabernacle. Since Joshua did not attend to this state of affairs, he was responsible for the people’s neglect of the commandment to be fruitful and multiply, for which he was punished by remaining childless.

אמר רבי שמואל בר איניא משמיה דרב גדול תלמוד תורה יותר מהקרבת תמידין דאמר ליה עתה באתי

The Gemara now cites a further teaching in this regard: Rabbi Shmuel bar Inya said in the name of Rav: Torah study is greater than the offering of daily sacrifices, as the angel said to Joshua: “I am now come,” i.e., on account of the second sin, demonstrating that neglect of Torah study is a more serious offense than neglect of the daily offerings.

אמר רב ברונא אמר רב כל הישן בקילעא שאיש ואשתו שרויין בה עליו הכתוב אומר נשי עמי תגרשון מבית תענוגיה

With regard to the neglect of the commandment of procreation, Rav Beruna said that Rav said: Whoever sleeps in a chamber in which a husband and wife are resting, thus thwarting their intimacy, the verse says about him: “The women of my people you cast out from their pleasant houses” (Micah 2:9), and his punishment is detailed in that chapter.

ואמר רב יוסף אפילו באשתו נדה

And Rav Yosef said: This applies not only to a woman who is ritually pure and permitted to her husband, but even in the case of a man whose wife is menstruating, for even then, although she is prohibited to him, they are more comfortable being alone together.

רבא אמר אם אשתו נדה היא תבא עליו ברכה ולא היא דעד האידנא מאן נטריה

Rava said: If his wife is menstruating, may a blessing come upon the person sleeping in the room, for he protects the couple from the possibility of sin. The Gemara rejects this: But that is not so, i.e., this argument is invalid, for who protected the husband until now? In other words, there is no need for concern in this case, and hence one must refrain from behavior that causes distress to the couple.

ההוא מבואה דהוה דייר בה לחמן בר ריסתק אמרו ליה אוגר לן רשותך לא אוגר להו

The Gemara returns to the issue of renting out domains for the purpose of an eiruv. The Gemara relates that there was a certain alleyway in which the gentile, Laḥman bar Ristak, lived. His Jewish neighbors said to him: Rent us your domain, i.e., your right to use the alleyway, so that it will not render it prohibited for us to carry. He would not rent it to them, and therefore they could not carry in the alleyway on Shabbat.

אתו אמרו ליה לאביי אמר להו זילו בטילו רשותייכו לגבי חד הוה ליה יחיד במקום גוי ויחיד במקום גוי לא אסר

The Jewish neighbors came and spoke to Abaye, asking him how they might proceed. He said to them: Go, all of you, and renounce your domains, i.e., your rights to use the alleyway, in favor of one person, who will be permitted to carry in it. In this manner it is a case of one individual living in the same place as a gentile. And the halakha has already been established that in the case of one individual living in the same place as a gentile, the gentile does not render it prohibited for him to carry. Consequently, one person at least will be able to make use of the alleyway.

אמרו ליה מידי הוא טעמא אלא דלא שכיח דדיירי והכא הא קדיירי

They said to him: But isn’t the reason that no restrictions are imposed when one person lives together with a gentile in the same courtyard only that it is not common for people to live with a gentile in that fashion? But here, many people are in fact living in the same alleyway as the gentile. In this more common situation, the Sages did impose restrictions.

אמר להו כל בטולי רשותייהו גבי חד מילתא דלא שכיחא היא ומילתא דלא שכיחא לא גזרו בה רבנן

Abaye said to them: Any renunciation of the domains of many people in favor of a single individual is an uncommon occurrence. The principle is that in the case of an uncommon occurrence, the Sages did not issue a decree as a preventive measure. In pressing circumstances such as the se, one may rely on this allowance.

אזל רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע אמרה לשמעתא קמיה דרבא אמר ליה

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, went and reported this halakha before Rava, who said to him: