Eruvin

A karpaf is allowed for every town;1 so R. Meir, but the Sages ruled: A karpaf was allowed only2 between two towns,3 and in connect ion with this it was stated: R. Huna laid down: A karpaf is allowed for each town, while R. Hiyya b. Rab held: Only one karpaf is allowed for both towns?4 — Both rulings were required. For if we had been informed only of the ruling here,5 it might have been presumed [to apply to this case only] because originally6 all the town was a permitted domain,7 but not to the case there.8 And if we had been informed of the ruling there only, it might have been presumed [to apply to that case alone] because [one karpaf is] too cramped for the use of two towns, but not here9 where the space of one karpaf would not be too cramped.10 Hence both rulings were required. And11 what perpendicular distance is allowed between the [middle of the imaginary] bow-string and the arch?-Rabbah son of R. Huna12 replied: One of two thousand cubits.13 Raba the son of Rabbah son of R. Huna replied: Even one greater than two thousand cubits. Said Abaye: Logical reasoning is in agreement with Raba the son of Rabbah son of R. Huna, since14 any person can, if he wishes, go around15 by way of the houses.16 IF THERE WERE RUINS TEN HANDBREADTHS HIGH etc. What is meant by RUINS? — Rab Judah replied: Three walls without a roof on them.17 The question was raised: What is the ruling in the case of two walls upon which there was a roof? Come and hear: The following are included in the Sabbath boundary of a town. A sepulchral monument of the size of four cubits by four,18 a bridge or a cemetery that contains a dwelling chamber, a synagogue that has a dwelling-house for the hazan,19 a heathen temple that contains a dwelling-house for its priests,20 horse-stalls or storehouses In open fields, to which dwelling-chambers are attached, watchmen's huts in a field, and a house on a sea island.21 All these are included in the Sabbath boundary of a town. The following, however, are not included in it: A sepulchral monument that was broken on two sides, the gap extending from one end to the other, a bridge or a cemetery that contains no dwelling-chamber, a synagogue that had no dwelling-house for the hazan, a heathen temple that contained no dwelling-house for its priests,20 horse-stalls or storehouses in open fields, to which dwelling chambers are not attached, a pit, a ditch, a cave, a wall or a dove-cote in a field, and a house in a ship.22 All these are not included in the Sabbath boundary of a town.23 At all events It was here taught: ‘A sepulchral monument that was broken on two sides, the gap extending from one end to the other’. Does not this refer to a case where there was a roof on top?24 — No, it may be a case where there was no roof on top. Of what use is a ‘house on a sea island’? — R. Papa replied: The reference here is to a house into which a ship's tackle is moved. But is not a ‘cave’ included in the Sabbath boundary of a town? Did not R. Hiyya in fact teach: A cave is included in the Sabbath boundary of a town? — Abaye replied: He referred to a cave at the entrance of which was a built structure. Might not then its inclusion be inferred solely on the ground of the structure? — The ruling25 was required only in a case where the cave supplemented the prescribed size.26 R. Huna ruled: For those who dwell in huts27 the Sabbath limits are measured from the very doors of their huts.28 R. Hisda raised an objection: And they pitched by the Jordan, from Beth-yeshimoth,29 in connection with which Rabbah b. Bar Hana30 stated: ‘I myself saw the place and it measured three parasangs by three’.31 Now was it not taught: When they attended to their needs they turned neither front nor sideways but backwards?32 — Raba answered him: You speak of the divisions in the wilderness! Since about them it is written: At the commandment of the Lord they encamped and at the commandment of the Lord they journeyed,33 they could well be regarded as constituting a permanent settlement.34 R. Hinena b. R. Kahana ruled in the name of R. Ashi: If among the huts there are three courtyards of two houses35 each, all the encampment assumes the characteristics of a permanent settlement.36 Rab Judah citing Rab remarked: Dwellers in huts and travelers in the desert lead a miserable life,37 and their wives and children are not really their own. So it was also taught: Eliezer of Biria38 remarked: Those who dwell in huts are like those who dwell in graves, and concerning their daughters Scripture says: Cursed be he that lieth with any manner of beast.39 What is the reason? Ulla explained: Because they have no bath houses;40 and R. Johanan explained: Because they [allow each other to] perceive the times of their ritual immersion.41 What is the practical difference between them?42 — The case where a river is near the house.43 R. Huna said: No scholar44 should dwell in a town where vegetables are unobtainable. This then implies that vegetables are wholesome, but was it not taught: Three kinds of food increase One s excrements, bend one's stature and take away a five hundredth part of the human eyesight, viz. 13 and the discussion infra 57bf). that are adjacent to one another, what need was there for R. Huna's ruling in respect of one town that was only severed in two on account of a breach? use of even one karpaf. down supra that the Sabbath limit is measured from an imaginary line joining the two ends. to pass from one end of the bow-shaped town to the other end and then to proceed also along the imaginary cord that joins these ends, the entire area enclosed by the arc and cord is deemed to be occupied by houses and courtyards. boundary in accordance with a previous ruling in our Mishnah. dwelling-house even though no one lives in it. town. of a town. than the minimum size prescribed, neither it nor the cave may be included in the Sabbath boundary of the town. of which may freely move within it (however large its area) and two thousand cubits beyond it in all directions. Each hut is regarded as a single unit. consequently to walk for the purpose a distance of three parasangs. How since this long walk, far exceeding a Sabbath limit, was permitted, it follows that an encampment consisting of huts also assumes the character of a town. An objection against R. Huna. temptations of the unscrupulous. homes. The men, however, would still be leaving their homes in quest of a warm bath. Ulla's reason is, therefore, applicable in such a case also while that of R. Johanan does not apply.