Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 3, scan section 76

TRACT ERUBIN. 193 It was taught: R. Hyya bar Ashi said: " A side-beam may be made of a grove." R. Simeon ben Lakish said: " A cross- beam may be made of a grove." One who says, that a cross- beam may be made of a grove certainly permits a side-beam also to be made of a grove; but he who says, that a side-beam may be made thus, does not permit a cross-beam. Why so ? Because a cross-beam must be sound enough to hold a brick one span thick, and as a grove (being used for idolatry) must be burned, it is considered as if it were already burned, hence not sound enough to hold a brick of the prescribed thickness. MISHNA: If the quantity of food (required for the combi- nation) become diminished, one may (himself) add thereto and transfer his right of possession without notifying the other inmates (to that effect). If, however, new inhabitants have (since) arrived in the alley, he adds sufficient to make up the required legal quantity, transfers his right of possession to them and notifies them to that effect. How much is this legal quan- tity (of food required for the combination of alleys) ? If those who join therein are numerous, it must be sufficient for two meals for all of them ; but if they be few, the size of a dried fig for each is sufficient. R. Jose said : " To what does this regulation apply ? To the original (first) preparation of the Erub; but to extend the Erub (for later use) any quantity, however small, is sufficient. Nor did the sages direct that (where the combinations of an alley had been effected) an Erub should be prepared for the several courts (contained in the alley) except that the children might not forget about the law of Erub. GEMARA : What food does the Mishna refer to as having become diminished ? Shall we assume, that it was but one kind of food, then even had it been totally destroyed, it was not nec- essary to notify the other inmates; if on the other hand there were two kinds of food, then, even, if it became diminished, the man was in duty bound to notify the other inmates, as we have learned in a Boraitha: " If the food was all of one kind and was totally destroyed, one need not notify the other inmates; but if the food was of two different kinds, one must notify the other inmates." (It was assumed that the same law applied to food who, out of spite, would not combine, so that the other inmates of the alley would be prevented from carrying on the Sabbath ; hence, in this instance no further explana- tion by Rashi was necessary. VOL. III. — 13 194 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. that had merely become diminished, but the Gemara answered 🙂 " The Boraitha refers to food that had been totally destroyed, but with food that had become diminished, it is different. " " Hoiv viuch is this legal quantity?'' etc. What does the Mishna mean to say by " numerous " ? Said R. Jehudah in the name of Samuel: "Eighteen persons." Eighteen and not more ? Say, from eighteen on and upwards. Then why state eighteen in the first place ? Said R. Itz'hak the son of R. Jehu- dah : My father explained this to me thus : If the food were divided equally amongst all and the share of each for two meals would not amount to the size of a dried fig, then those who took part were " numerous," and it is suflficient if the share of each did not amount to the size of a dried fig; but if the share of each amounted to more than the size of a dried fig, those who took part are considered few, and even if each received but the size of one dried fig, it is sufHcient. (Thus both are the more lenient constructions of the law.) Incidentally we are told by R. Jehudah that eighteen dried figs are sufificient for two meals. MISHNA: The Erub (of courts) or combination (of alleys) may be effected with all kinds of nutriment except water and salt. Such is the dictum of R. Eliezer. R. Jehoshua, however, said : Only a whole loaf of bread is a lawful Erub. Should even a whole saah of flour be baked into one loaf, and that be broken, it must not be used for an Erub, while a small loaf of the value of an Eesar (a small coin ; probably the Roman " as "), if it be whole, may be used for an Erub. GEMARA : Have we not already learned the first clause of this Mishna (in Chapter III., Mishna i), that the Erub or combi- nation may be effected with all kinds of nutriment except water and salt ? Said Rabba bar bar Hana : This Mishna repeats the ordinance solely on account of R. Jehoshua, who maintains, that only a whole loaf is a awful Erub, but not a broken loaf. Hence we are taught that with all kinds of nutriment it may be effected, including a broken loaf. What reason has R. Jehoshua for his assertion ? Said R. Jose ben Saul in the name of Rabbi: " In order to prevent enmity (lest one say he deposited a whole loaf and another a broken loaf, etc.)." Said R. A'ha the son of Rabba to R. Ashi : " How is it if all deposited broken loaves?" and R. Ashi answered: "There is fear that the next time the Erubin are deposited there will be the same strife. One will deposit a whole loaf and another a broken one, etc." TRACT ERUBIN. 195 R. Johanan ben Saul said: " If from a whole loaf of bread the legal first dough (ofTering) has been removed or from a whole loaf of bread made of Therumaih and ordinary flour the legal one-hundredth part had been removed, the loaf is still consid- ered whole, and an Erub may be efTected therewith." Did we not learn in a Boraitha, that the loaf remains whole, and may be used for an Erub if the legal one-hundredth part had been removed, but if the quantity of the legal first dough had been removed it does not remain whole and must not be used for an Erub ? This presents no difficulty. R. Johanan refers to the loaf of a baker who must remove only a small piece for the first dough, while the Boraitha refers to a loaf of a householder as we have learned in a Mishna (Tract Chalah) : "The prescribed quantity for the first dough is one twenty-fourth. One who pre- pares the dough for his own use or for the wedding (feast) of his son must also give one twenty-fourth; but a baker, or even a woman who prepares the dough for sale in the market, need only give one forty-eighth as the legal first dough." R. Hisda said: " If a man made a loaf whole again by join- ing the broken pieces with a stick of wood, so that it appeared like an unbroken loaf, he may use it for an Erub." Said R. Zera in the name of Samuel: " It is permitted to make an Erub with bread made of rice or millet." Said Mar Uqba: " Samuel the Master explained to me that rice-bread may be used for an Erub but not millet-bread." R. Hyya bar Abhin in the name of Rabh said : It is also permitted to make an Erub with lentil-bread. MISHNA: A man may give money to the wine-seller or