Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Eruvin 42

1) HALACHAH: AN OBJECT TAKEN OUT OF ITS "TECHUM"

The Tana Kama and Rebbi Nechemyah argue with regard to a fruit that was taken out of its Techum of 2000 Amos. According to the Tana Kama, it is permitted to eat that fruit in every case except in a case when it was taken out of the Techum on purpose, b'Mezid, and it is still outside of its Techum. Rebbi Nechemyah says the opposite: it is always prohibited to eat the fruit, unless it was taken out only accidentally, b'Shogeg, and it has now been returned to its Techum. What is the Halachah?

TOSFOS (DH Michlal), the ROSH, and others rule leniently, that one may eat the fruit unless it was taken out of its Techum b'Mezid and is still outside of its Techum. Their reasoning is because Rav Papa rules that fruit that was taken out b'Mezid and was then returned to its Techum is permitted to be eaten (and the Gemara implies that if the fruit is still *outside* of its Techum but was taken there *b'Shogeg*, there is more reason to permit it than if the fruit was returned to its place but taken out b'Mezid.) Therefore, we rule like the Tana Kama that in every case the fruit may be eaten, except for when it was taken out b'Mezid and is still outside of its Techum. This is also the Halachah as recorded in the SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 405:9).

OPINIONS: Rav Huna and Rav Nachman argue concerning a case where a person was standing in an open area, in which he was Koneh Shevisah and could walk 2000 Amos in every direction, and on Shabbos gentiles built a fence around him 3000 Amos away (turning the entire area into a Reshus ha'Yachid).

According to Rav Nachman, one may *carry* (that is, he may throw) an object throughout the entire enclosed area of 3000 Amos, but one is not allowed to walk outside of his Techum of 2000 Amos. According to Rav Huna, since one is not allowed to walk outside of his Techum, he may not throw an object past his 2000 Amos, lest he forget and walk after his object. Rav Huna adds that not only may he not throw outside of his 2000 Amos, but it is also prohibited for him to carry *inside* his 2000 Amos, because it is considered an area that is open completely to a place to which it is forbidden to carry -- "Parutz b'Milu'ah l'Makom ha'Asur Lah." Therefore, one may carry only in an area of four Amos around where one is standing.

The Halachah follows the more lenient opinion, i.e. that of Rav Nachman, that one is permitted to carry throughout the entire enclosed area. However, there is an argument concerning what Rav Nachman means when he says that it is permitted to carry throughout the entire area.

(a) RASHI (DH Metaltel b'Chulah) says that it is permitted to carry throughout the 2000 Amos in the normal manner of carrying, and the only reason why one must throw if he wants to carry an object beyond the 2000 Amos is because he is not allowed to walk beyond that limit. According to Rav Nachman, his 2000-Amah area is not considered to be "Parutz b'Milu'ah l'Makom ha'Asur Lah." This is also the ruling of the RITVA.

(b) TOSFOS (DH u'Metaltel) says that Rav Nachman only permits *throwing* even *within* the 2000 Amos. Tosfos explains that since outside of 2000 Amos one is not permitted to carry things there (because he cannot walk there) and he may only throw things there, therefore it is considered "Parutz b'Milu'ah l'Makom ha'Asur Lah" as far as *carrying* is concerned. Only as far as *throwing* is concerned is the person's 2000 Amos considered to be open to a place in which it is permitted to carry.

Tosfos' proof appears to be from the Gemara later (42b) that says that Rav Huna -- who prohibits using the 2000 Amos for throwing or carrying -- says that it is permitted to pull an object from outside one's 2000 Amos to inside his 2000 Amos. If so, why does the Gemara here say that his 2000- Amah area is "Parutz b'Milu'ah l'Makom ha'Asur Lah" if he *is* allowed to carry in that area in one way or another (by pulling objects from there to inside his Techum)? It must be that it can be considered "Parutz b'Milu'ah l'Makom ha'Asur Lah" for *some* forms of carrying even though for other forms of carrying it is not considered "Parutz... l'Makom ha'Asur Lah."

HALACHAH: The REMA (OC 403:1) rules like Tosfos' understanding of Rav Nachman, that one may only *throw* within the 2000 Amos and outside of the 2000 Amos. However, the SHA'AR HA'TZIYON (403:4-5) rules leniently, like Rashi, based on the ruling of the VILNA GA'ON and other Acharonim who prove that Rashi's view seems to be more correct, and it is not considered "Parutz b'Milu'ah l'Makom ha'Asur Lah" at all since it is permitted to throw into the area outside of his 2000 Amos.

42b

QUESTION: Rav Nachman says that one may carry, by throwing, outside of the 2000-Amah limit of his Techum when gentiles built a fence around him on Shabbos. The Gemara proposes that Rav Nachman holds like Raban Gamliel, who said in the Mishnah (41b) that a person taken out of his Techum into a Dir or Sahar (different types of enclosed areas) is allowed to walk around in the entire enclosed area. Even though if one is taken to a Bik'ah, an open area, he may not walk more than four Amos, Raban Gamliel maintains that there is no Gezeirah prohibiting him from walking outside of his four Amos in a Dir or Sahar lest he err and think that he may also walk outside of his four Amos in a Bik'ah. Similarly, Rav Nachman also maintains that there is no Gezeirah prohibiting one from carrying (by throwing) beyond his 2000-Amah Techum lest he be drawn after his object and walk beyond his Techum.

RASHI (DH Lo Gazrinan) discusses the opinion of Rav Nachman. Rashi asks how can the Gemara say that Rav Nachman holds like Raban Gamliel? Raban Gamliel says that one may walk in the entire area of the Dir or Sahar, even though at the time that Shabbos entered he was not dwelling within those Mechitzos. Rav Nachman, though, says that if the gentiles built a fence around him at a distance of 3000 Amos away, he may *not* walk within the entire enclosed area (but only in his original 2000 Amos) since he was not dwelling within those Mechitzos at the time that Shabbos entered!

In his first answer, Rashi says that indeed, Rav Nachman does *not* agree with Raban Gamliel entirely. Rav Nachman holds that one is not allowed to walk within the entire enclosed area of Mechitzos when one was not dwelling in the area of those Mechitzos at the beginning of Shabbos, while Raban Gamliel holds that one does not need to be dwelling within the four Mechitzos. Rav Nachman agrees with Raban Gamliel only insofar as that he does not make a Gezeirah to prohibit throwing. That is, the only reason why we would expect Raban Gamliel to prohibit walking in the Dir or Sahar more than four Amos is a Gezeirah lest one walk more than four Amos in a Bik'ah, and we find that Raban Gamliel does *not* hold of such a Gezeirah. Similarly, the only reason why we would expect Rav Nachman to prohibit *throwing* outside of 2000 Amos is because of a Gezeirah that one might carry outside of 2000 Amos, yet we see that Rav Nachman does not hold of such a Gezeirah. In that respect he agrees with Raban Gamliel.

Why did Rashi say this? Rashi earlier (42a, DH Mehalech Bah Alpayim) said that even Raban Gamliel agrees that one is limited to four Amos if he was not dwelling within the Mechitzos when Shabbos entered. The only reason he may walk the entire enclosed area of the Dir or Sahar is because in that case, he was an *Ones* and was forced out of his Techum and taken to that area against his will, so the Rabanan were not stringent with him to prohibit him from walking beyond four Amos. However, if one is within his original Techum and has his 2000 Amos (such as in Rav Nachman's case), there is no need to be lenient and give him the entire enclosed area. If so, Raban Gamliel's ruling does not apply in the case of Rav Nachman, and even Raban Gamliel would agree that he is limited to his Techum of 2000 Amos when the gentiles built a fence around him on Shabbos. This is also what Rashi says here on 42b as his second answer. Why, then, did Rashi find it necessary to give another explanation? (In fact, in the text of Rashi as quoted by the RITVA and other Rishonim, the second answer does not even appear!) (RITVA, MAHARSHAL)

ANSWER: The SEFAS EMES answers that Rashi's logic is applicable only if Raban Gamliel holds that m'Ikar ha'Din, one may *not* walk throughout the entire Dir or Sahar, and that it is a special dispensation that the Rabanan gave to one who was *forced* against his will to be restricted to only four Amos. The Rabanan only gave this dispensation to such a person, allowing him to walk throughout the entire Dir or Sahar.

However, at this point in the Gemara, the assumption is that Raban Gamliel's ruling (that one is permitted to walk throughout the entire enclosed area) is m'Ikar ha'Din, and that even if one was not dwelling within the Mechitzos at the onset of Shabbos, nevertheless the entire area enclosed by those Mechitzos are considered to be his four Amos. The only reason that Raban Gamliel would *not* permit walking in the entire Dir or Sahar is because of a Gezeirah lest one walk throughout a Bik'ah.

Consequently, Rashi could not say that if one never left his original 2000 Amos then he may not walk in the entire Dir or Sahar according to Raban Gamliel. Why should he *not* be allowed to, since no Gezeirah is applied to prohibit it? Walking in the entire area of a Dir or Sahar is not a special dispensation given by the Rabanan, but it is the rightful law!

What Rashi wrote on 42a, though, was according to the *conclusion* of the Gemara here, where the Gemara concludes that one may walk throughout the entire area of an enclosed area (that is, the entire area is considered his four Amos) *only* if he was dwelling within those Mechitzos when Shabbos began, and even Raban Gamliel agrees with that. The only reason Raban Gamliel permits one to walk throughout the entire Dir or Sahar is because the Rabanan gave a special dispensation for someone stuck outside of his Techum, and they did not require him to remain restricted to four Amos. However, normally a person should *not* have the ability to walk throughout the entire Dir or Sahar, because he was not dwelling within that area when Shabbos began.