Previous daf

1)

(a) Someone who lends on interest or who deals with Shemitah-produce is disqualified from testifying in Beis-Din - because both are willing to sin for monetary gain, and can therefore not be trusted to testify honestly. Note: This Pesul is not necessarily a Pesul d'Oraysa.

(b) According to Rebbi Yehudah, Asmachta is Koneh (so a gambler is not invalidated for stealing). He is disqualified because he does not involve himself in normal human occupations, and does not therefore care much about the losses of his fellow Jew.

(c) The Tana Kama agrees with Rebbi Yehudah, because according to all opinions, when Rebbi Yehudah says 'Eimasai' (which he does here) he comes to qualify, and not to dispute.

(a) The author of the Beraisa, which explicitly disqualifies a gambler even if he *has* another occupation - is Rebbi Yehudah quoting Rebbi Tarfon.

(b) Rebbi Tarfon said that - if one man declares that he will be a Nazir should the man who is passing turn out to be one, and his friend says that he will be one if he isn't, neither is a Nazir, because neither statement was clear-cut, in which case it was not made with a full heart.

(c) A similar Sevara applies to a gambler: since he does not know for sure hat the outcome of his gambling will be, he does not relinquish his money with a full heart, and the second person is therefore not Koneh.

3)

(a) It *is* necessary to specify on whose behalf the Eruv Techumin is being placed ('le'Chol B'nei Iri' or 'le'Chol Mi she'Yelech le'Beis ha'Avel' etc.).

(b) It is not possible to add to the list of participants once Shabbos has entered.

(c) There is no proof from our Mishnah, which specifically mentions a case of Beis ha'Avel or Beis ha'Mishteh, that an Eruv Techumin is only permitted for a D'var Mitzvah - because the Tana may have mentioned the case of Beis ha'Avel or Beis ha'Mishteh only because it is the norm to make an Eruv for that purpose, but not to preclude a case of Reshus.

(a) 'Kol *she'Kibel* Alav mi'be'Od Yom, Mutar' - implies 'Ein Bereirah' (that is why if he only joined the Eruv on Shabbos, he would not be Yotze. Therefore Rav Ashi changes the text to 'Kol she'Hodi'uhu mi'be'Od Yom' - implying that, even if he only decided to join *on* Shabbos - in order to accommodate the opinion that holds 'Yesh Bereirah'.

(b) The maximum age given for a child to be Patur from Sucah - is four or five (depending on the child's intelligence).

(c) Resh Lakish describes a minor who is no longer tied to his mother's apron strings - as one who does not call out 'Mummy Mummy'! as soon as he wakes up.

(d) Rav Yehoshua brei de'Rav Idi explains that a child of four or five has already left his mother's apron-strings, and an Eruv will need to be made on his behalf; Rav Asi however, (who gives the age as six) is speaking when his father made an Eruv in one direction, and his mother in the other. Rav Asi is telling us that up to the age of six, a child prefers to go with his mother than with his father.

5)

(a) We cannot answer that the Beraisa ('Katan she'Tzarich le'Imo, Yotze be'Eruv Imo ad ben Shesh') too, speaks when his father as well as his mother made an Eruv - because the Beraisa says 'ad ben Shesh', which incorporates all children from one up to six follow the mother's Eruv. So just as a one year old baby follows its mother automatically, even if the father did not make an Eruv for it, so will be the case by a six year old.

(b)

1. Rav Asi therefore, explains *ad ben Shesh'* - to mean 'Ad ve'Ad Bichelel' (that 'until six' means including six), to conform with his own opinion.
2. Rebbi Yanai and Resh Lakish establish the Beraisa - when the father is not around, because then he is tied to his mother's apron strings until the age of six; whereas *they* are speaking when the father *is* around, in which case, the child leaves his mother's side at four or five.

(a)

1 . One cannot make an Eruv on behalf of one's wife or grown-up son, or of one's Jewish servants without their consent.
2. One can however, make an Eruv on behalf of one's small children or one's non-Jewish slaves even against their will.

(b) If a man makes an Eruv on behalf of his wife, and she does not protest, she cannot then turn round on Shabbos and claim that she never intend to go by his Eruv - because we interpret her silence as consent.

(c) She could demonstrate her protest - by making her own Eruv.

(d) Exactly the same will apply to one's grown-up son or Jewish servant.

(a) According to Rebbi Meir, people eat more on Shabbos, because the food is better. Therefore we gauge the two meals for an Eruv Chatzeros by the weekday-meal (Lehakel); whereas Rebbi Yehudah gauges the Eruv by the Shabbos-meal (Lehakel), because, in his opinion, they tend to eat less at each meal (due to the extra meal that one eats on Shabbos).

(b) If a person eats less than the Shiur stated by our Mishnah, then he gauges the two meals by his own appetite, but if he has a large appetite, then he gauges them by the Shiur of the Mishnah - both Lekulah.

(c) Rabah rules like Rebbi Meir in our Mishnah, in spite of the general principle 'Rebbi Meir ve'Rebbi Yehudah, Halachah ke'Rebbi Yehudah' - because of the popular (proven) saying 'Ravcha li'Vesima Shechi'ach' (that a person eats more of sweet things), with which Rebbi Yehudah does not contend.

(a) There are ...

1. ... forty-eight Pundiyonim in a Sela.
2. ... There are six Kabin in a Sa'ah.

(b) If a loaf made of four Sa'ah costs one Sela - then, for a Pndiyon, one would receive a loaf of half a Kav.

(c) 'Chetzyah le'Beis ha'Menuga' - means half of that (i.e. one ninth of a Kav) with regard to becoming Tamei in a house which is stricken with Tzara'as (i.e. if someone remained in a stricken house for the amount of time that it would take to eat one quarter of a Kav - approx. six eggs - of bread), he would become Tamei.

(d) Half of the above for Pesul Gevi'ah - means that if a Kohen eats the Shiur of an eighth of a Kav, he becomes Tamei (mi'de'Rabbanan), to the extent that he is forbidden to eat Terumah (though he does not transmit Tum'ah further).

(a) Since, according to Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah, a half a Kav comprises *two* meals, then a whole Kav comprises *four*; whereas according to Rebbi Shimon, a Kav comprises *nine* - Is that what you call close, asks the Gemara?

(b) The third that we have to deduct is the third that the baker takes as remuneration for his work and services. Consequently, the half a Kav, according to Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah, really comprises, *six* meals, not just *four*. This brings the two amounts closer (six to a Kav of Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah against the nine of Rebbi Shimon.

(c) In fact, concludes the Gemara, the baker takes not a third for himself, but a half, in which case, a Kav comprises eight meals according to Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah (against the nine of Rebbi Shimon).

Next daf