What is holding a Sefer Torah Arum?

Rashi: It is without a cloth.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Teshuvas R. Akiva Eiger (58): Tosfos says that the Isur applies to all Kisvei ha'Kodesh that are Metamei hands. Therefore, if a Mezuzah is not covered, one may not touch it [e.g.] when leaving his house, unless he touches it via his sleeve. In particular, sometimes his hands are filthy! Why do we touch Tefilin Arum? This is the Mitzvah - it is impossible unlike this! Chasam Sofer (OC Reish 691) says that his Rebbi R. Nasan Adler was careful to touch Megilas Esther only via a cloth.

Why is there such a punishment for holding a Sefer Torah Arum?

Iyun Yakov: Man's body is compared to a Sefer Torah. If one was present at the time of death, he must tear, for this is like a Sefer Torah that was burned (105b). Rashi explained, even the lowliest Yisrael has Torah and Mitzvos.

Maharal (13b): Why did Chachamim decree Tum'ah on one who touches a Sefer? It has no Tum'ah. This appears ludicrous! This is not ludicrous. Nadav and Avihu entered a place of Kedushah without Bigdei Kehunah lacking the Me'il (Vayikra Rabah 20), and they died, and they were Metamei. The Sefer has no Tum'ah, but one who approaches something improper for him, Tum'ah comes to him. The Tum'ah is due to the person!

Why is it unreasonable to say that be is truly buried naked?

Iyun Yakov: We never found a Yisrael buried naked, even a total Rasha.

Why will he be buried bare of that Mitzvah?

Iyun Yakov: One eats the Peros of Torah in this world, and the principal is intact for him in the world to come - if he learns properly. If Torah is disgraced to him - he holds the Torah Arum, his reward is only in this world. "Bi'Smolah Osher v'Chavod" - those who are Masmilin (Lo Lishmah) about Torah get wealth and honor, but not reward in the world to come. He is buried naked of [reward for] that Mitzvah.

What is the significance of Eruvin [and Netilas Yadayim]?

Rashi: It is a fence lest one transgress Hotza'ah. One may not take from his Reshus to another's Reshus (without an Eruv), even though both are Reshus ha'Yachid.

Maharsha: "Bni Im Chacham Libecha" - you are wise to enact Eruvin, for a fence against Hotza'ah on Shabbos, "Yismach Libi Gam Ani", that people will not transgress. "Chacham Beni v'Samach Libi " refers to the decree of Netilas Yadayim, a fence for Terumah. Some people belittle it - "va'Ashivah Chorfi Davar."

SMaG (Aseh d'Rabanan 1, citing Rav Hai Gaon): Before Shlomo, Yisrael engaged in wars. An army camp is exempt from Eruv Chatzeros and Netilas Yadayim. In the days of Shlomo there was Shalom, so he enacted Eruvin and Netilas Yadayim.

Rav Hai Gaon (in Teshuvas ha'Ge'onim, Musafiyah 76): Before Shlomo, did Yisrael not conduct Eruvin?! They were busy with war, and were not able to measure from city to city, fix openings of Mavuyos and place Eruvin. (NOTE: It seems that he discusses Eruvei Chatzeros and Eruvei Techumin. Yisrael often had serenity before Shlomo, e.g. "va'Tishkot ha'Aretz" in the days of Osni'el ben Kenaz, Devorah, and Gid'on for 40 years each, like Shlomo's reign, and 80 years in the days of Ehud! - PF)

Iyun Yakov: A hint to this is "va'Yavo Yakov Shalem va'Yichan Es Pnei ha'Ir" - he enacted Eruvei Techumin, according to the opinion that it is mid'Rabanan. The Avos fulfilled also mid'Rabanan laws. According to the opinion that it is mid'Oraisa, he enacted Eruvei Chatzeros. See Tosfos Yom Tov (Eruvin 1:10). (NOTE: He explains that the Bartenura exempts an army camp from Eruvei Chatzeros, but not from Eruvei Techumin, which have a support from verses. Why does Iyun Yakov explain differently according to the opinion that Eruvei Techumin are mid'Oraisa? That opinion says so about the Techum of 12 Mil, but all agree that the Techum of one Mil is mid'Rabanan! - PF)

Rav Elyashiv: Tosfos (Eruvin 21b) asked why a Bas Kol came for Eruvin and Netilas Yadayim, but not for Sheniyos to Arayos. The Chasam Sofer said that the Bas Kol was not for the Isur to eat with Tamei hands, or to take from house to house in the Chatzer. At the same time that he forbade these, he gave solutions. "Im Chacham Libecha" - you did not only forbid, rather, you also gave Heterim. This does not apply to Sheniyos, therefore there was no Bas Kol for it.

Rav Elyashiv citing R. Eliyahu Shik: "Zeh Hayah Chelki mi'Kol Amali" - Rav and Shmuel argued about whether Shlomo was left with only his staff, or only Gondo (an earthenware Kli). A staff hints to walking - the Isur to go 2000 Amos from the city, unlike those who say that we discuss Eruvei Chatzeros. A Kli Cheres hints to Netilas Yadayim, which must be from a Kli. (NOTE: Why do Rav and Shmuel argue? He made both enactments! Perhaps "Zeh" implies one matter; the other he decreed afterwards. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: Sifri (on Bamidbar 18:7) implies that Netilas Yadayim for Kodshim [and Terumah] is mid'Oraisa. Sedei Chemed says that surely it is an Asmachta. Meshech Chochmah (Shemos 30:19) says that it is mid'Oraisa for Kodshim of Matanos Kehunah, but not for a Yisrael who eats his Korban; Shlomo decreed about this. Our Gemara says that Hillel and Shamai decreed about Terumah. How can a verse about Terumah (in Bamidbar) teach about Kodshim, but not about Terumah?!