ERUVIN 11 (30 Av) - Dedicated l'Iluy Nishmas Esther Chaya Rayzel (Friedman) bas Gershon Eliezer on the day of her Yahrzeit by her son-in-law, Eli Turkel of Raanana, Israel. Esther Friedman was a woman of valor who was devoted to her family and gave of herself unstintingly, inspiring all those around her.


(a)What did Rav say about the Beraisa which says with regard to a Tzuras ha'Pesach that is wider than ten Amos: 'Ein Tzarich Lema'et'?

(b)Does an Amaltera rectify a Mavoy whose entrance is more than ten Amos wide?


(a)When Rav heard the Beraisa which says (with regard to a Tzuras ha'Pesach that is wider than ten Amos) 'Ein Tzarich Lema'et' - he told the Beraisa expert to change the text to 'Tzarich Lema'et'.

(b)The Gemara concludes that an Amaltera does not rectify a Mavoy whose entrance is wider than ten Amos. When the Beraisa writes (regarding an Amaltera) 'Ein Tzarich Lema'et', it is referring to the Reisha (a Mavoy that is higher than twenty Amos), but not to one that is wider than ten Amos mentioned in the Seifa.


(a)What did Rav Yosef deduce from Rav's stringency concerning a Tzuras ha'Pesach (see previous question), with regard to a Chatzer whose majority (of each of the four sides) consists of a series of Tzuros ha'Pesach?

(b)How does the Gemara refute Rav Yosef's proof, from Pasei Bira'os?

(c)The Beraisa reads 'Arba Defanos Halalu, she'Ruban Pesachim va'Chalonos, Mutar ... '? The Gemara changes the text. How does the new text read? Why does the Gemara find it necessary to change it?

(d)Why is there no proof from this Beraisa for Rav Yosef?


(a)From the fact that Rav took a strict line regarding the Tzuras ha'Pesach of a Mavoy that is more than ten Amos wide, Rav Yosef learnt a 'Mah Matzinu' by a Chatzer whose majority (of each of the four sides) consists of a series of Tzuros ha'Pesach from a Mavoy: A breach of more than ten Amos forbids by a Mavoy, and 'Parutz Merubeh Al ha'Omed' forbids by a Chatzer; just as the former is not permitted by means of Tzuros ha'Pesach, so too will the latter not become permitted by means of a series of Tzuros ha'Pesach.

(b)The Gemara refutes this proof from Pasei Bira'os - by which 'Parutz Merubeh Al ha'Omed' becomes permitted (even according to Rebbi Meir), whereas a breach of more than ten Amos does not (according to him).

(c)'Arba Defanos Halalu, she'Ruban Pesachim va'Chalonos' - clearly indicates 'Parutz Merubeh al ha'Omed', so how can the Beraisa then go on to say ''u'Vilevad she'Yehei Omed Merubeh al ha'Parutz'? Surely, Omed ke'Parutz should suffice! Therefore the Gemara changes the text to 'Arba Defanos Halalu, she'Riba Bahen Pesachim va'Chalonos'.

(d)This Beraisa does not prove that even with Tzuros ha'Pesach, one requires 'Omed Merubeh al ha'Parutz' (like the contention of Rav Yosef) - because it speaks about Pischei Shima'i (whose Tzuros ha'Pesach are not properly shaped), whereas Rav Yosef is speaking when they are.


(a)What are 'Pischei Shima'i'?


(a)Pischei Shima'i - means either that there is no straight door-post, only a crooked one (where every second brick protrudes), or that there is nothing on top to serve as a lintel.


(a)What are the ramifications of a Tzuras ha'Pesach by Kil'ayim?

(b)According to Resh Lakish, the same Tzuras ha'Pesach that is effective by Kil'ayim, is effective by Shabbos. What does Rebbi Yochanan hold?

(c)They could be arguing over a Tzuras ha'Pesach that is wider than ten Amos. What else might they be arguing about?


(a)Although one may not normally sow seeds next to a vine, this is permitted if there is a wall in between. This concession applies even if the wall consists of no more than a Tzuras ha'Pesach.

(b)According to Rebbi Yochanan, the Tzuras ha'Pesach (which will be described immediately) that is valid by Kil'ayim, is not valid by Shabbos.

(c)They could be arguing over a Tzuras ha'Pesach that is wider than ten Amos - but they could also be arguing over one whose crossbeam was affixed to the side of the two vertical posts, and not on top: Resh Lakish permits this both by Kil'ayim and by Shabbos, whereas Rebbi Yochanan confines the Heter to Kil'ayim, but forbids it on Shabbos - like the opinion of Rav Chisda.



(a)How do we reconcile Resh Lakish with another statement, in which, quoting Rebbi Yehudah b'Rebbi Chanina, he permits 'Pe'ah' by Kil'ayim, but not by Shabbos?

(b)In which two ways can we reconcile Rebbi Yochanan's statement here with his own statement there, where he forbids Pe'ah, even by Kil'ayim?

(c)From where does Rebbi Yochanan know to differentiate between a Tzuras ha'Pesach that is ten Amos wide and one that is more than ten Amos wide - even by Kil'ayim?

(d)How did he know that Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri was referring to a case when the cross-beam was fitted to the side of the side-posts, and not to the top?


(a)In the second statement, where Resh Lakish differentiates between Kil'ayim and Shabbos (with regard to Pe'ah - weaving a branch to the sides of two posts, to form a Tzuras ha'Pesach), he is quoting his Rebbe (Rebbi Yehudah b'Rebbi Chanina); whereas his first statement, where he does not differentiate, is his own opinion.

(b)If Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish are arguing in a case when the crossbeam is placed on top of the two side-posts (like the first explanation in 4c), then we can establish Rebbi Yochanan's second statement (where he forbids Pe'ah even by Kil'ayim) when the crossbeam is affixed to the side of the posts. Alternatively, both statements speak about a crossbeam that is at the side; however, his first statement speaks when it is less than ten Amos wide, his second when it is more.

(c)Rebbi Yochanan learnt to differentiate by Kil'ayim, between ten Amos and more than ten Amos when the beam is fixed to the side of the side-bars, from an incident that he related to Resh Lakish, concerning Rebbi Yehoshua and his Rebbe, Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri: Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri told Rebbi Yehoshua that ten Amos wide would be permitted, but that more than ten Amos would be prohibited.

(d)Now Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri cannot have been referring to a crossbeam that was placed on top of the posts - because if so, he would not have prohibited more than ten Amos (in view of a Beraisa quoted later - 16b - which specifically permits even more than ten Amos wide by Kil'ayim. Consequently, he must have been referring to a cross-beam that was affixed to the side.


(a)How strong must a Tzuras ha'Pesach (for Shabbos) be?

(b)Does a Tzuras ha'Pesach require a door?

(c)Does a Tzuras ha'Pesach require a Heker Tzir?

(d)What is a Heker Tzir?


(a)A Tzuras ha'Pesach - must be strong enough to hold a door (even if it is only made of straw).

(b)No! A Tzuras ha'Pesach does not require a door.

(c)It does however, require a Heker Tzir.

(d)Heker Tzir - is the hole into which the hinge fits, and which enables the door to swing open and shut.


(a)Who was Rav Gada, and what did he do?

(b)Why did the Resh Galusa's men lock him up?

(c)How long did he spend in goal?


(a)Rav Gada - was Rav Sheshes' servant (the Shamash). Acting upon Rav Sheshes' instructions - he tore down a Korah that Rav Nachman had placed, but which was suspended above the side-posts without actually touching them.

(b)The Resh Galusa's men locked him up - because Rav Nachman had set up the Korah on their behalf.

(c)He did not however, spend long in goal - because Rav Sheshes stood by the door and announced that Gada should go free, and he did.


(a)According to Rebbi Meir, an archway requires a Mezuzah; according to the Rabbanan, it does not. In which case do the Rabbanan agree with Rebbi Meir?

(b)In which cases does Rebbi Meir agree with the Rabbanan?

(c)In which case then do they argue, and what is the basis of their Machlokes?

(d)When Rabah bar Shmuel told this to Rav Sheshes, what did Rav Sheshes tell him, and why was that?


(a)The Rabbanan agree with Rebbi Meir, that an archway requires a Mezuzah - if the legs of the archway are ten Tefachim tall, before it begins to curve.

(b)Rebbi Meir agrees with the Rabbanan that the archway does not require a mezuzah - either if the legs do not reach three Tefachim before the curve begins (since whatever is less than three Tefachim from the ground, is considered as if it was joined to the ground (in which case, it is as if there was no entrance there at all) or even if they do, if the total height of the archway is less than ten Tefachim.

(c)They argue when the curve of the archway begins after a height of three Tefachim, and when the top of the structure exceeds ten; it is not however, four Tefachim wide from the curve and upwards: Rebbi Meir holds that whatever is between three and ten Tefachim is considered as if it was carved out (leaving us with a proper doorway of ten Tefachim high, and four Tefachim wide.

(d)Since we consider the top seven Tefachim as if they were carved out (according to Rebbi Meir), it is clear that the top of the Pesach is not required to touch the side-posts and still it is Kasher (and even the Rabbanan would agree with that, if were they to hold 'Chokekin le'Hashlim'. That is why, when Rabah bar Shmuel told this to Rav Sheshes, he instructed him not to say anything to the household of the Resh Gelusa, because he felt embarrassed, since Rav Nachman had now been vindicated.


(a)According to the Tana Kama of our Mishnah, a Mavoy according to Beis Shamai, requires a Lechi and a Korah; according to Beis Hillel, it only requires one or the other. What are the other two opinions (Rebbi Eliezer and a Talmid quoting Rebbi Yishmael) in this matter?

(b)How do we reconcile our Mishnah with Chananya and with his Tana Kama, who also require a door or a Tzuras ha'Pesach (respectively) - at the other end?

(c)What prompts the Gemara to suggest that, according to Beis Shamai, a Reshus ha'Yachid requires four walls - min ha'Torah (and Beis Hillel three)?

(d)What do Beis Shamai (and Beis Hillel) really hold?


(a)According to Rebbi Eliezer - a Mavoy always requires two Lechayayim; and according to a Talmid quoting Rebbi Yishmael - Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel argue by a Mavoy that is more than four Amos, but one that is less, needs either a Lechi or a Korah, but not both - even according to Beis Shamai.

(b)Chananya and his Tana Kama also require a door or a Tzuras ha'Pesach (respectively) - at the other end - because they are speaking about an open Mavoy (a Mavoy Mefulash); whereas our Mishnah, which does not, is speaking about one that is closed at the other end (a Mavoy Sasum).

(c)Why would Beis Shamai require a Lechi and a Korah by a Mavoy Mefulash - unless he holds that min ha'Torah, a Reshus ha'Yachid requires four walls; and why should Beis Hillel require a Lechi or a Korah, unless in his opinion, min ha'Torah a Reshus ha'Yachid requires three walls?

(d)In reality, the Gemara concludes, a Reshus ha'Yachid with three walls is also called a Reshus ha'Yachid - as far as throwing something into it from a Reshus ha'Rabim. The Chachamim however, forbade one to carry in a Reshus unless it has four walls, which is why Beis Shamai requires a Lechi and a Korah by a Mavoy Mefulash. By exactly the same token, Beis Hillel require two walls min ha'Torah, but three (mi'd'Rabbanan) in order to carry.