עירובין 18

18:1

TO REMOVE [THE STRIPS] TO ANY [DISTANCE] PROVIDED ONE INCREASES THE STRIPS. R. JUDAH SAID: [THE ENCLOSURE MAY BE ONLY] AS LARGE AS TWO BETH SE'AH, BUT THEY SAID TO HIM: [THE LIMIT OF] TWO BETH SE'AH WAS PRESCRIBED FOR A GARDEN OR A KARPAF ONLY, BUT IF [THE ENCLOSURE] WAS A CATTLEPEN, A FOLD, A BACKYARD OR A COURTYARD IT MAY BE [AS BIG AS] FIVE OR TEN BETH KOR. AND [FOR THIS REASON] IT IS PERMITTED TO REMOVE [THE STRIPS FROM THE WELL TO] ANY DISTANCE PROVIDED ONE INCREASES THE NUMBER OF THE STRIPS. GEMARA. Must one assume that our Mishnah is not in agreement [with a ruling of] Hanania; for it was taught: Strips of wood may be put up round a cistern and ropes around a caravan, but Hanania ruled: Ropes [may be put up] round a cistern but not strips of wood? — It may be said [to agree] even [with the ruling of] Hanania for a cistern and a well belong to two different categories. There are [others] who read: Since it was not stated Hanania ruled: ‘Ropes must be put up round a cistern and strips of board [may be put up] round a well’, it may be inferred that [according] to the view] of Hanania both in the case of a cistern and in that of a well, only ropes are permitted but not strips of wood; must one then assume that our Mishnah is not in agreement [with the ruling of] Hanania? — It may be said [to agree] even [with the ruling of] Hanania, for he only replied to that of which the first Tanna had spoken. Must it be assumed that our Mishnah is at variance with [a ruling of] R. Akiba; for we learned: ‘Strips of wood may be provided for a public well, a public cistern as well as for a private well, but for a private cistern a screen ten handbreadths high must be provided; so R. Akiba’, whereas here it was stated [that such strips of wood may be provided] for WELLS. [Does it not then follow:] only for WELLS but not for cisterns? — It may be said [to be in agreement] even with R. Akiba, for it only taught of a well of living water because [the law in its case is] definite, there being no difference whether it was public or private, but it did not teach concerning a cistern containing collected [water] since [the law in its case] is not definite. Need it be suggested that our Mishnah is at variance with a ruling of R. Judah b. Baba; for we learned, ‘R. Judah b. Baba ruled: Strips of wood may be set up round a public well only’, whereas here it was stated [that such strips may be set up] for WELLS, implying that there is no difference whether they were public or private? — It may be said to agree even with R. Judah b. Baba, for by WELLS were meant [public] wells in general. What is the meaning of deyomadin? R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar replied: Deyo ‘amudin. (Mnemonic: Two, under a ban, praise, dove, house, two, was cursed, by a relationship three.) We learned elsewhere: R. Judah ruled: All wild figs are exempt [from the restrictions of demai] excepting those of deyufra. What [is the meaning of] ‘deyufra’? — Ulla replied: A tree that bears fruit twice a year. R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar said: The first man had two full faces, for it is said in Scripture: Thou hast shaped me behind and before. It is written: And the Lord God builded the side etc. Rab and Samuel [differ on the meaning of ‘side’]. One explains: A full face and the other explains: A tail. According to him who explained: ‘a full face’, it was quite proper for Scripture to state: Thou hast shaped me behind and before; but according to him who explained: ‘A tail’, what [could be the meaning of] Thou hast shaped me behind and before? — As R. Ammi explained, for R. Ammi said: [Adam was] behind [last] in the work of the creation and before [the others] for retribution. One may well concede that he was ‘behind in the work of the creation’, since he was not created before the Sabbath eve; what means, however, ‘Before [the others] for retribution’? Shall I say [it refers] to the curse, surely, [it could be objected] was not the serpent cursed first, Eve afterwards and Adam last? — But [it refers] to the flood; for it is written in Scripture: And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle etc. According to him who explained: ‘a full face’ it is easy to see why And He formed [wa-yizer] was written in Scripture with two yods; according to him, however, who explained: ‘A tail’ what [could be the significance of] ‘And he formed’? — [It may be explained] in agreement with R. Simeon b. Pazzi, for R. Simeon b. Pazzi said, ‘Woe to me on account of my evil inclination; woe to me on account of my creator’, According to him who explained: ‘A full face’ it was quite correct for Scripture to write: Male and female created He them; but according to him who explained: ‘A tail’, what [could be the interpretation of] ‘Male and female created He them’?- [The text was required] for [an explanation] like that of R. Abbahu. For R. Abbahu pointed out an incongruity: It is written in Scripture: Male and female created He them. Previously it is written: In the image of God created He him; [and he explained:] At first it was the intention that two should be created but ultimately only one was created. According to him who explained: ‘A full face’, the expression of ‘And closed up the place with flesh instead thereof’, is quite intelligible; but according to him who explained: ‘A tail’, what [could be the meaning of] ‘And closed up the place with flesh instead thereof’? — R. Zebid (or as some say: R. Nahman b. Isaac) replied: The text refers only to the place of the cut. According to him who explained: ‘A tail’ it was quite proper for Scripture to write: And He builded, but according to him who explained: ‘A full face’, what [could be the significance of] ‘And He builded’? — In agreement with that which has been stated by R. Simeon b. Menassia. For R. Simeon b. Menassia made the following exposition: ‘And the Lord God builded the side’ teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, plaited Eve's hair and then brought her to Adam, for in the sea-towns a plait is called ‘building’. Another interpretation of ‘And the Lord God builded’: R. Hisda stated [or, as others say, it was taught in a Baraitha]: This teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, built Eve in the shape76

—

18:2

of a storehouse. As a storehouse is [made] wide below and narrow above so that it may contain the produce, so was [the womb of] a woman [made] wide below and narrow above so that it may contain the embryo. ‘And brought her to Adam’ teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, acted as groomsman for the first man. From here [you may infer] that a great man should act as groomsman for a minor person and feel no regrets about it. With reference to the view of him who explained: ‘A full face’ which of them walked first? — R. Nahman b. Isaac replied: It is reasonable to assume that the male walked first; for it was taught: No man should walk on a road behind a woman, even if she is his own wife. If she happened [to be in front of] him on a bridge he should leave her on one side; and whosoever crosses a river behind a [married] woman has no share in the world to come. Our Rabbis taught: A man who counts out money for a woman from his hand into hers or from her hand into his, in order that he might look at her, will not be free from the judgment of Gehenna even if he is [in other respects] like our Master Moses who received the law at Mount Sinai; and concerning him Scripture said: Hand to hand, he will not be free from evil [which means,] he will not be free from the judgment of Gehenna. R. Nahman said: Manoah was an ignorant man, since it is said: And Manoah arose, and went after his wife. R. Nahman b. Isaac demurred: Now then, since in the case of Elkanah it is written ‘And Elkanah went after his wife’, was he also [an ignorant man]? Or in the case of Elisha, since it is written in Scripture: And he arose, and followed her, was he also an ignorant man? But [the meaning is] ‘after her words and her counsel’ so here also [could it not be explained:] ‘After her words and her counsel’? Said R. Ashi: On R. Nahman's assumption that Manoah was an ignorant man, he did not attend even a school for Scripture, for it is written: And Rebekah arose, and her damsels, and they rode upon the camels, and followed the man, but they did not precede the man. R. Johanan remarked: [Let one walk] behind a lion but not behind a [married] woman; behind a [married] woman but not behind an idol, behind an idol but not behind a synagogue at the time the congregation is praying. R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar further stated: In all those years during which Adam was under the ban he begot ghosts and male demons and female demons, for it is said in Scripture: And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years and begot a son in his own likeness, after his own image, from which it follows that until that time he did not beget after his own image. An objection was raised: R. Meir said: Adam was a great saint. When he saw that through him death was ordained as a punishment he spent a hundred and thirty years in fasting, severed connection with his wife for a hundred and thirty years, and wore clothes of fig [leaves] on his body for a hundred and thirty years. — That statement was made in reference to the semen which he emitted accidentally. R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar further stated: Only a part of a man's praise may be said in his presence, but all of it in his absence. ‘Only a part of a man's praise . . . in his presence’, for it is written in Scripture: For thee have I seen righteous before Me in this generation; ‘but all of it in his absence’, for it is written in Scripture: Noah was in his generations a man righteous and wholehearted. R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar further stated: What [was signified] when it was written: And lo in her mouth an olive-leaf freshly plucked? The dove said to the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘May my food be as bitter as the olive but entrusted to your hand rather than sweet as honey and dependent on a mortal’; for here it is written ‘freshly plucked’ and elsewhere it is written: Feed me with mine allotted bread. R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar further stated: Any house in which the words of the Torah are heard at night will never be destroyed; for it is said in Scripture: But none saith: ‘Where is God my Maker who giveth songs in the night’. R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar further stated: Since the Sanctuary was destroyed it is enough for the world to use only two letters [of the Tetragrammaton], for it is said in Scripture: Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord, praise ye the Lord. R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar further stated: When Babylon was cursed, her neighbours also were cursed, but when Samaria was cursed her neighbours were blessed. ‘When Babylon was cursed her neighbours also were cursed’, for it is written: I will also make it a possession for the bittern, and pools of water; ‘but when Samaria was cursed her neighbours were blessed’, for it is written: Therefore I will make Samaria a heap in the field,

—