עירובין 83 — Soncino English Talmud

¹One taught: And half of the half of its half is the size susceptible to levitical uncleanness of food. But why did not our Tanna mention the levitical uncleanness of food? — Because their prescribed sizes are not in exact proportions. For it was taught: How much is half a peras? The size of two eggs minus a fraction; so R. Judah. R. Jose ruled: Two large sized eggs. This was calculated by Rabbi to be the size of two eggs and a slight surplus. How much was that surplus? — A twentieth part of an egg. In respect of the levitical uncleanness of food, however, it was taught: R. Nathan and R. Dosa explained that the size of the egg of which the Rabbis have spoken includes the egg itself and its shell, but the Sages explained: The egg only, exclusive of its shell. Rafram b. Papa citing R. Hisda stated: This is the ruling of R. Judah and R. Jose, but the Sages ruled: The size is one and a half large sized eggs. But who are the Sages? R. Johanan b. Beroka of course; is not this then obvious? — His purpose was to inform us that the eggs must be large sized. When R. Dimi came he related that Bonios once sent to Rabbi a modius of artichokes that came from Nausa, and Rabbi calculated its capacity to be two hundred and Seventeen eggs. What kind of se'ah, however, was it? If it was the desert se'ah it should have contained a hundred and forty-four eggs, and if it was the Jerusalem se'al it should have contained a hundred and seventy-three eggs, and if again it was the one of Sepphoris It should have contained two hundred and seven eggs. It was in fact a Sepphoris measure but the quantity of the dough-offering was added to them. But how much is the dough-offering? Nine eggs; would not then the number still be less? — The fact is that the surpluses spoken of by Rabbi were added to them. If so, would not the number be greater? — As it does not amount to the size of a whole egg he does not reckon it. Our Rabbis taught: The Jerusalem se'ah exceeds that of the desert one by a sixth, and that of Sepphoris exceeds that of Jerusalem by a sixth. Thus it follows that the measure of Sepphoris exceeds that of the desert by a third. A third of which? Would you suggest: A third of the desert measure? Observe then: How much is a third of the desert measure? Forty-eight eggs; whereas the surplus amounts to sixty-three! If again a third of the Jerusalem measure was meant, how much, [it could be retorted,] is a third of it? Fifty-eight minus one third; whereas the surplus is sixty-three! Is then the reference to the measure of Sepphoris? How much, [it may be asked,] is a third of it? Seventy minus one; whereas the surplus is sixty-three! — Rather, explained R. Jeremiah it is this that was meant: It follows that the se'ah of Sepphoris exceeds that of the desert by nearly a third of itself and that a third of itself is nearly equal to a half of the desert measure. Rabina demurred: Was any mention at all made of approximation? — Rather, explained Rabina, it is this that was meant: It follows that a third of the Sepphoris measure together with the surpluses spoken of by Rabbi exceeds the half of the desert measure by a third of an egg. Our Rabbis taught: Of the first of your dough50^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ^ᵃᵏ^ᵃˡ^ᵃᵐ^ᵃⁿ^ᵃᵒ^ᵃᵖ^ᵃᵠ^ᵃʳ^ᵃˢ^ᵃᵗ^ᵃᵘ^ᵃᵛ^ᵃʷ^ᵃˣ

^ᵃnote:Of the size of the loaf prescribed in our Mishnah by R. Johanan and R. Simeon respectively.
^ᵇnote:According to R. Johanan the size is three quarters of an egg. For, since he defined the size of a whole loaf as a quarter of a lab, or six eggs, the ‘half of the half of its half’ must be equal to 6/2 X 2 X 2 = 3/4 of an egg. According to R. Simeon, since a whole loaf is equal to 1/3 of a kab, or 24/3 = 8 eggs, the ‘half of the half of its half’ must be equal to 8/2 X 2 X 2 = 1 egg.
^ᶜnote:In our Mishnah.
^ᵈnote:That for (a) the defilement of one's body and (b) the defilement of food.
^ᵉnote:Sc. the size of the latter (cf. prev. n.) is not exactly a half of the former.
^ᶠnote:Lit., ‘a broken piece’ Sc. of bread that, if levitically unclean, renders one's body unfit to eat terumah.
^ᵍnote:Small sized (cf. infra).
^ʰnote:In agreement with R. Simeon's standard in our Mishnah.
^ⁱnote:Lit., ‘laughing’.
^ʲnote:On examining a Se'ah measure whose capacity is nominally that of six kab or 6 X 24 = 144 eggs, but whose actual capacity was greater than that number of eggs.
^ᵏnote:Lit., ‘and more’.
^ˡnote:In respect of each egg of capacity.
^ᵐnote:As being susceptible to levitical uncleanness.
^ⁿnote:Lit., ‘like itself and like etc. This size obviously is not exactly a half of any of the sizes prescribed by (a) R. Judah, (b) R. Jose or (c) Rabbi for the defilement of one's body according to whom it should have been either (a) an egg minus a fraction or (b) a large sized egg and its shell, or (c) in egg and a twentieth.
^ᵒnote:A size which is smaller even than half of the one prescribed by R. Judah and much more so than those prescribed by the others.
^ᵖnote:The Baraitha prescribing the size of half a peras.
^ᵠnote:Whose standard for ‘erub, as explained Supra by R. Hisda, is that of a loaf of a quarter of a kab or six eggs, the half of the half of which is obviously 6/2 X 2 = 1 1/2 eggs.
^ʳnote:Apparently it is. What need then was there for R. Hisda to repeat what he had once stated?
^ˢnote:Lit., ‘he came’.
^ᵗnote:From Palestine to Babylon.
^ᵘnote:A Roman measure of the same capacity as a Se'ah,
^ᵛnote:Or ‘copied from the standard measure of Nausa’ (Jast. q.v.).
^ʷnote:Cf. supra n. 9
^ˣnote:Sc. the se'ah measure used by the Israelites in the time of Moses in the wilderness.
^ʸnote:A Se'ah equals six kab = 6 X 4 log = 6 X 4 X 6 = 144 eggs.
^ᶻnote:Which exceeds that of the desert by a fifth.
^ᵃᵃnote:Since 144 + 144/5 = 144 + 28 4/5 = 172 4/5 or 173 eggs approx.
^ᵃᵇnote:Which exceeded that of Jerusalem by a fifth.
^ᵃᶜnote:173 + 173/5 = 173 + 34 3/5 = 207 3/5 or 207 eggs approx.
^ᵃᵈnote:Lit., ‘bring . . . throw upon them’, sc. Rabbi's calculations which show a higher figure include also the quantity of the dough-offering that is due from a Se'ah or two hundred and seven eggs of dough.
^ᵃᵉnote:So with R. Han. as cited by Tosaf. a.l. Cur. edd., ‘eight’.
^ᵃᶠnote:A twenty-fourth part of the dough (cf. supra 81a). 217/24 = 9 1/24 or 9 approx.
^ᵃᵍnote:Than two hundred and seventeen (cf. prev. n.).
^ᵃʰnote:Not the quantity of the dough-offering.
^ᵃⁱnote:Sc. Rabbi's surpluses which amount to 1/20 of an egg for each egg amount to 1/20 X 207 or 10 7/20 eggs for a se'ah of the size of 207 eggs (cf. p. 579, n. 17). 207 + 10 7/20 = 217 7/20 or 217 approx.
^ᵃʲnote:Than the number 217, by 7/20
^ᵃᵏnote:It amounts only to seven twentieths (Cf. nn. 4 and 5).
^ᵃˡnote:Of the latter measure, sc. a fifth of the former.
^ᵃᵐnote:144/3 = 48.
^ᵃⁿnote:207 144 = 63.
^ᵃᵒnote:173/3 = 57 2/3.
^ᵃᵖnote:207/3 = 69.
^ᵃᵠnote:Since 207 — 144 = 63 and 207/3 = 69. 63 is nearly equal to 69.
^ᵃʳnote:69.
^ᵃˢnote:144/2 = 72. This figure is quite near to 69.
^ᵃᵗnote:Lit., ‘near, near he taught’. How then could it be maintained by R. Jeremiah that ‘nearly’ a third etc. was meant.
^ᵃᵘnote:Sc. (207 + 207 X 1/20) X 1/3 = (207 + 10 7/20) X 1/3 = 217/3 approx. = 72 1/3 approx.
^ᵃᵛnote:144/2 = 72.
^ᵃʷnote:Since (cf. prev. two notes) 72 1/3 — 72 = 1/3.
^ᵃˣnote:Ye shall set apart a cake for a gift (sc. as a dough-offering); Num. XV, 20.

²only if it is of the size of your dough; and what is the size of your dough? That of the dough of the wilderness. And what was the size of the dough of the wilderness? The one which is described: Now an omer is the tenth part of an ephah, from which it has been deduced [that dough made of a quantity of] flour of seven quarters [of a kab] and a fraction is liable to the dough-offering. This [quantity] is equal to six Jerusalem kab or five of the Sepphoris kab. From this it has been inferred that if a person consumes such a quantity of food he is sound in body and happy in mind. He who consumes a greater quantity is a glutton and he who consumes less suffers from bad digestion. MISHNAH. IF THE TENANTS OF A COURTYARD AND THE TENANTS ON ITS GALLERY FORGOT TO JOIN TOGETHER IN AN ‘ERUB, ANY LEVEL THAT IS HIGHER THAN TEN HANDBREADTHS BELONGS TO THE GALLERY, AND ANY LOWER LEVEL BELONGS TO THE COURTYARD. THE BANK AROUND A CISTERN, OR A ROCK, THAT IS TEN HANDBREADTHS HIGH BELONGS TO THE GALLERY BUT IF IT IS LOWER IT BELONGS TO THE COURTYARD. THIS, HOWEVER, APPLIES ONLY TO ONE THAT ADJOINS THE GALLERY, BUT ONE THAT IS REMOVED FROM IT, EVEN IF TEN HANDBREADTHS HIGH, BELONGS TO THE COURTYARD. AND WHAT OBJECT IS REGARDED AS ADJOINING? ONE THAT IS NOT FURTHER THAN FOUR HANDBREADTHS. GEMARA. It is quite obvious that if an area is easily accessible to two courtyards the law is exactly the same as in the case of a window between two courtyards; that if it is accessible to either courtyard only through thrusting the law is exactly the same as in the case of a wall between two courtyards; that if it is accessible to either only by means of lowering their things the law is identical with that of a trench between two courtyards; that if to the one it is easily accessible but to the other it is accessible only by means of thrusting, the law is identical with that which Rabbah son of R. Huna cited in the name of R. Nahman; that if it was easily accessible to the one while to the other it was accessible only by means of the lowering of objects, the law is identical with the one which R. Shezbi cited in the name of R. Nahman; what, however, is the law where it is accessible to one by means of lowering and to the other by means of thrusting? — Rab ruled: Both are forbidden [access], but Samuel ruled: Access to it is granted to the tenants that can use it by means of lowering things since to them its use is comparatively easy while to others its use is comparatively difficult, and any area the use of which is convenient to one and difficult to another is to be assigned to the one to whom its use is convenient. We learned: IF THE TENANTS OF A COURTYARD AND THE TENANTS ON ITS GALLERY FORGOT TO JOIN TOGETHER IN AN ‘ERUB ANY LEVEL THAT IS HIGHER THAN TEN HANDBREADTHS BELONGS TO THE GALLERY AND ANY LOWER LEVEL BELONGS TO THE COURTYARD. Assuming that by GALLERY^ᵃʸ^ᵃᶻ^ᵇᵃ^ᵇᵇ^ᵇᶜ^ᵇᵈ^ᵇᵉ^ᵇᶠ^ᵇᵍ^ᵇʰ^ᵇⁱ^ᵇʲ^ᵇᵏ^ᵇˡ^ᵇᵐ^ᵇⁿ^ᵇᵒ^ᵇᵖ^ᵇᵠ^ᵇʳ^ᵇˢ^ᵇᵗ^ᵇᵘ^ᵇᵛ^ᵇʷ^ᵇˣ^ᵇʸ^ᵇᶻ^ᶜᵃ

^ᵃʸnote:Need the dough-offering be set apart.
^ᵃᶻnote:Ex. XVI, 36.
^ᵇᵃnote:Since an ‘omer is a tenth part of an ephah which (cf. Men. 77a) equals three se'ah, an ‘omer = 3/10 se'ah = 3 X 6/10 kab = 3 X 6 X 4/10 log = 36/5 = 7 1/5 log = (since a log = 6 eggs) 7 log and 1 1/5 of an egg.
^ᵇᵇnote:Corresponding to seven log.
^ᵇᶜnote:Sc. 1 1/5 of an egg (cf. n. 4).
^ᵇᵈnote:Since the quantity mentioned represents the usual size of dough consumed by a person in twenty-four hours (cf. Ex. VI, 16, 18ff).
^ᵇᵉnote:In twenty-four hours (cf. prev. n.).
^ᵇᶠnote:Lit., ‘blessed’.
^ᵇᵍnote:Above it. Tenants whose house doors opened into galleries above courtyards had no direct access to the public domain except through the courtyard into which they gained entry by means of a ladder.
^ᵇʰnote:But separate ‘erubs were prepared for each group of tenants.
^ᵇⁱnote:Such as a mound or a pillar.
^ᵇʲnote:The tenants of the gallery but not those of the courtyard may, therefore, use it.
^ᵇᵏnote:Lit., ‘less than here’.
^ᵇˡnote:Whose tenants may use it, but not those of the gallery.
^ᵇᵐnote:Each of which had a separate ‘erub. Lit., ‘(accessible) to this by a door and to this by a door’.
^ᵇⁿnote:Enunciated supra 76a.
^ᵇᵒnote:Being on a higher level than the courtyard.
^ᵇᵖnote:Supra 76b, 78b.
^ᵇᵠnote:Being on a lower level.
^ᵇʳnote:Supra 77a.
^ᵇˢnote:Being on the same level as one courtyard but on a higher level than the other.
^ᵇᵗnote:Lit., ‘by a door’.
^ᵇᵘnote:Being on a level with one courtyard and on a lower level than the other.
^ᵇᵛnote:Being lower than the one courtyard and higher than the other.
^ᵇʷnote:Sc. do the tenants of the two courtyards respectively impose restrictions upon each other, because neither can conveniently use that area, or is a distinction drawn between the respective degrees of inconvenience?
^ᵇˣnote:The tenants of the two courtyards.
^ᵇʸnote:Lit., ‘to this’.
^ᵇᶻnote:Sc. to those who occupy the higher courtyard.
^ᶜᵃnote:Lit., ‘it went up on your mind: what is’.