Daf 26

1) You can make an Eiruv from any food besides water, salt, mushrooms and truffles. [Rashi says that this refers to both Eiruv Chatzeiros and T'chumim. Tosfos says that it refers only to Tchumim, since you can only use bread for Eiruv Chatzeiros as we'll see in the eighth Perek.]

2) Anything that a Zav lifts is Tamai [Tosfos: either because he moves it, or carries it. However, this is only if the Zav moves the whole item as we Darshen that it's like you're touching all of it since you're making it all move. But if he only carries part of it, and the other half of the item is still on the floor and unmoved, the Ri was in doubt whether this type of Tumah is only for objects that are designated for this. After all, we learn that from a Drasha from "whatever the Zav is below," which is written by Medris, so, it might be similar to Medris. Just like Medris that needs to be designated to be leaned on, so too by moving objects, its needs to be designated for people to carry.]

3) Anything that a Zav is carried on is Tahor, except for something made for sitting or riding, a person, or the wood attached to the saddle that a rider holds on to when he rides. [R' Tam says that the other utensils are only Tahor from having the stringent Tumah of Medris, but become regular light Tumah. After all, the Gemara in Nidda, besides having a Drasha to exclude Nidda blood from making Tamai Medris, needs a separate Drasha to exclude it that it's not Tamai from Evan Misamah (i.e., a heavy stone), which R' Tam explains it's Tamai like something that is sat on (and it's a Chidush that, since it's so heavy, the object underneath the rock would not take notice of the weight of the Zav on top of it). Now, if we already excluded it from Medris, Evan Misamah should also be included. Rather, we must explain that the second Drasha is to exclude it from even a light Tumah so we shouldn't even give it the Tumah of regular utensils that are not designated for sitting are Tamai when they're sat on. Therefore, we must say that the Gemara held that regular utensils are Tamai light Tumah when sat on, and is only not Tamai stringently like regular Medris.

However, Tosfos found a Toras Kohanim that says that utensils not made for sitting are Tahor from even light Tumah and is completely Tahor. The Gemara in Nidda must hold that Evan Misamah has some Drasha to say that it only has a light Tumah, and not a stringent Tumah like other Medris; and that's why we need a Drasha to exclude it from light Tumah, and it's not because we might compare it to other utensils that are not made for sitting, because they don't even get a light Tumah by Medris.]

4) You can buy any food with money that you redeemed Maasar Sheini except for water and salt. However, you may buy a mixture of water, salt and oil with it. According to this version, if you can buy this mixture with Maasar Sheini money, you may, of course use it for an Eiruv. However, there is a version that this was taught about Eiruv. If so, it would only be allowed by Eiruv, but you can only buy items with Maasar Sheini money that come from reproduction and take their nutrients from the ground, (and not water and salt. even in a mixture). [Tosfos points out; we say here that Maasar Sheini is stricter than Eiruv, although we find a Chumra by Eiruv that we don't find by Maasar Sheini regarding that you can't use items that are not yet edible, like unripe dates and dried beans, for an Eiruv; that's not because Eiruv is stricter than Maasar Sheini, but just that it needs to be edible when you put it out, but you don't need to buy a ready to eat item for Maasar. However, if anything is fit to eat and can be used to buy Maasar Sheini, of course you can make an Eiruv with it since you don't need it to come from reproduction.]

5) Although the mixture has oil in it, the reason we don't say such a purchase is anyhow justified by the oil is because; we're referring to a case where you're also paying for the water and salt in the mixture. However, at the end of the day, we can justify that since you can always pay for food and absorb items that are secondary to it, like buying the hides of cattle with the meat, the wool of the sheep with the meat, and the jug with the wine. [Tosfos adds; regarding the Eiruv, we must say that the Chiddush is that the oil by itself is not enough for two meals worth, which is the Shiur for an Eiruv, without the salt and water.]

6) Regarding what to buy with Maasar Sheini money, the Pasuk says a general statement, then specifics, and then another generality. There are those who learn this Drasha as a Riboy V' Miut (that we include everything, except one item). According to R' Yehuda b. Gadish, we exclude salt and water. According to R' Elazar, we also exclude fish brine. There are some Tannaim who learn this Drasha as a Klal U'prat V'chlal (we only include items similar to the specifics). One says that it includes only items that come from reproduction and take their nutrients from the ground, which excludes fish since they don't get their nutrients from the ground, but from the water. Another one says that you also need the condition that it was created exclusively from earth, which excludes fowl since they were created from 'Rakak' (i.e., a mixture from earth and water).

Daf 28

7) You can make an Eiruv with the plant 'Gugdayos.' Even though we say that someone who doesn't have children shouldn't eat from it (since it reduces the chances for him to have children), and if the plant hardens when it produces seed, even those with many children shouldn't eat it; what we mean by making an Eiruv with it, that someone with many children may make an Eiruv with it while it's still soft since he can eat it. Alternatively, even someone who doesn't have children may make an Eiruv with it since it's edible to someone with children. This is like we say that a Nazir can make an Eiruv with wine, and a non-Kohain with Trumah. Alternatively, we allow it by the Gudgadyos from Madai, which is good for everyone to eat.

8) You can make an Eiruv with unripe wheat grown in a garden, (which is grown specially so people can eat it), but not regular unripe wheat since people don't eat it. Although it's eaten by people in Bavel, but since it's not eaten in the rest of the world, they're intent to make it food is null against what everyone else considers to be normal. [Tosfos says; this is only in this case where there is no reason why they should eat this unripe wheat in Bavel more than any other place. However, we find that someone growing thorns in a vineyard is Klayim in Arabia since they grow them to feed to camels. That's because other people would grow them too if they have so many camels like they have in Arabia. Therefore, in such a situation, we don't say that the intent of a whole city is null against the whole world. This is why the Gemara later says that we shouldn't follow the Persians who eat raw meat without bread to say that you need the Shiur of two meals of raw meat that's eaten without bread for an Eiruv, since they're not the most of the world, and didn't say that, "therefore, they're intent should be null." Rather, it says, that neither should be Batul to each other, like rich people don't follow the poor people, and the poor don't follow the rich. However, an individual's intent is still null in this case even when he has a good reason to do this that doesn't apply to the rest of the world.]

9) You make a Bracha Ha'adama on hops since it's a finished fruit, but a Shehakal on this unripe grain since it's not a finished fruit [Tosfos: unless it's grown in a garden, since it's a regular fruit, you would make a Ha'adama.] Although the hops grow parasitically on bushes, (you don't make a Shehakel on it like mushrooms) since it doesn't grow from the moisture of the air (like mushrooms), but it derives nutrients from the ground. A proof to this; if you cut down the bush, the hops will die too.

10) You can't make an Eiruv from dates that fell off from the tree before they're ripe. Even though it can become Tamai because of being food, that's because you can sweeten it (and make it edible) by heating it up over the fire.

11) A young date branch (that's soft and edible) doesn't become Tamai for being food [Tosfos; since it wasn't planted to eat the branches, it's not considered food], unless you cook and fry it. After all, cooking and frying even helps to make animal skins edible and able to become Tamai for being food. It could also be bought with Maasar Sheini money [Tosfos: since it's edible and comes from a reproduction of fruit.]

12) Regarding a Bracha on the branch; Shmuel holds to make a Shehakel since it will get hard if left on the tree. Although radishes also harden if left too long, and you make a Ha'adama, that's because they're planted specifically as to be the fruit. However, the palm tree is not planted to eat the branches, but to eat the dates. R' Yehuda says to make a Ha'adama since it's food that grows from the ground. The Halacha is like Shmuel that you make a Shehakol.

13) You make an Eiruv with a handful of hops, with a bundle of unripe wheat (the same amount as we wrap vegetables together), and a handful of fresh beans.

14) You can make an Eiruv with raw beets, but only ones that are fully raw, but not if they're partially cooked since it's dangerous to eat.

Daf 29

15) Just like apples can become Tamai for being a food, you can make an Eiruv with them. However, you need a Kav of them, and it's not like apricots that you can make an Eiruv with five of them, because they're more Chashuv. However, apples aren't too Chashuv, so you need more.

16) You need two Revious of non-cooked wine to make an Eiruv. However, by cooked wine, since it's used to eat with bread, you only need enough to eat bread for two meals with it.

17) You need enough vinegar to dip vegetables eaten in two meals that totally consist of vegetables. Other say: to dip vegetables eaten in two meals that you eat with bread.

18) You can only make an Eiruv with the bulb of the onions, but not with its leaves. However, this is only if it didn't grow a Zeres, since it's dangerous to eat them if you don't drink beer afterwards.

19) You can make an Eiruv with beer, and it invalidates a Mikva with three Lugum like any drawn water. Although it's colored; but it's no worse than colored water that invalidates with that amount. Although you might say that it's worse since it's not called water at all like "colored water;" but it still has the status of water since it's basically water. [Although diluted wine doesn't invalidate the Mikva this way even though it's three-quarters water, beer is different since its mainly water (with only a little bit of flavoring). Alternatively, since it's called 'wine,' it's a fruit derivative, and fruit doesn't invalidate a Mikva with three Lugim.]

20) You need two Revious of beer like you need by wine.

21) A Kos Shel Bracha needs a quarter of a Revious [Tosfos: a Revious is a quarter of a Lug] so it should be a Revious after you dilute it. [Tosfos asks: one of the things needed for a Kos Shel Bracha is 'Chai,' i.e., undiluted; so how can you say here that you need to dilute it? Rashi answers that you need to put it in the cup undiluted, and then dilute it. You shouldn't dilute the wine and then put it in the cup. R' Tam says that you put it in the cup half diluted (which the Gemara in Sanhedrin calls 'Chai'), and then you put more water during Birchas Ha'aretz to complete the dilution. The Bnai Nurvona says that the word 'Chai' refers to the cup, that it needs to be whole and not broken. After all, breaking a utensil is as if you killed it (as the Gemara says in Bava Kama). This answer fits well, since it will come out (according to this explanation) that all the ten things said by Kos Shel Bracha refers to the cup, and not the wine.]

22) R' Yosef says: when you make an Eiruv with dates; [Tosfos: the most you would need] is a Kav, since this is the amount for dried figs, and we see that it's more Chashuv since we consider it as a good thing that, if a non-Kohain eats dried figs, that he returns regular dates (since it's considered better than the dried figs, and is worth more). The Gemara rejects this proof, perhaps it's not actually better, and they're worth the same; but it's more marketable. So you're returning food that people will more likely jump at to buy than what you ate.

23) Anything that's eaten with bread, its Shiur is the amount needed for two meals to be eaten with bread. Anything that's eaten by itself, the Shiur is the amount needed for two meals to be eaten of it alone.

24) You can make an Eiruv with raw meat for the amount that you can eat it by itself since it's not eaten with bread. Rabbah says that roasted meat is for the amount that you eat it with bread. R' Yosef says that the amount that you need to eat it by itself, since the Persians eat it by itself without bread. The Gemara asks on him that we shouldn't go according to the Persians since they're not the majority of the population. Like we say that the poor people's cloths are Tamai with its smaller Shiur (of three finger's worth squared) and the rich people's cloths are Tamai according to their Shiur (three Tefachim squared), and you don't say that the poor people should follow the rich ones' Shiur. [Tosfos: regarding if it makes Tamai by Medris, since it implies in many places that, for regular Tumah, it doesn't make a difference if it's for a rich person or poor, the Shiur is three finger's squared. This is not like Rashi in Shabbos who says that you never have any Tumah of three fingers squared by a rich person.] You shouldn't say that we should just follow the more stringent case, and here follow Persians. After all, regarding Eiruv, we should always follow the more lenient amount, just like R' Shimon b. Elazar says that a sick or elder only needs the amount for two of their own meals (which is smaller than others); but a gluttonous man only needs the amount of two average meals.

Daf 30

25) R' Shimon b. Elazar agrees that, regarding a corpse that's in a house that doesn't have an opening large enough to remove it, all potential openings are Tamai, even if one of them is large enough to remove a normal corpse from, since we can't remove it by cutting it up, we need to open one of the openings larger to take it out. However this is only if the other openings are at least four Tefachim wide, but if this is the only one that's four Tefachim wide, you'll definitely only widen that opening, and the other openings are not Tamai.

26) you can make an Eiruv with raw meat and raw eggs. You need two eggs.

27) If someone makes an oath from 'Mazon,' he's permitted with salt and water. However, he can't have any other food since it's considered Mazon. According to Rav and Shmuel who say that you only make a Mezonos on things made of the five grains (and not everything is considered Mazon), we must say that they have the text "anyone that made an oath from 'Zon.' (and not Mazon). [Tosfos explains; although those who argue with Rav and Shmuel only say that you make a Mezonos on the five grains and rice and millet (and not on all foods); the original text is not difficult. Despite that everything is called Mazon, you only make Mezonos on things that you establish a meal on. However, according to Rav and Shmuel, you don't make a Mezonos on all things that you establish your meal on, since anything that's not from the five grains are by definition not Mazon. Therefore, the first text is difficult to them.] However, Rav and Shmuel were already disproved from a different Braisa.

28) The Rabanan hold that you can make an Eiruv with bread that you made an oath not to eat, or that you made an oath that the bread is forbidden to you. One Tanna according to R' Eliezer says that he argues and you can't make the Eiruv if you say that the loaf is forbidden to you. Everyone holds that you can't make an Eiruv with a loaf of Hekdesh since it's not fit for anyone to eat.

29) [Rashi explains the argument: if you can make an Eiruv with a loaf you made an oath over; whether the oath is from the main pleasure, that you can't eat it, or from all pleasures, and you can't have the pleasure of making an Eiruv with it. Alternatively, everyone holds that it's going on all pleasures, but they argue whether you can only make an Eiruv for a Mitzva, and Mitzvos weren't given to receive pleasure. Tosfos explains: really everyone holds that there is nothing technically wrong with making an Eiruv with the bread you made an oath over since you can only make an Eiruv for a Mitzva. Still, R' Eliezer decrees that you can't since you might come to make an Eiruv with Hekdesh.]

30) Beis Shammai holds that you can't make an Eiruv for a Nazir with wine. Although he agrees that you can make an Eiruv for an adult for Yom Kippur although he can't eat it, and it's only fit for others, i.e.., minors; that's because it's at least fit for the adult during the day, on Erev Yom Kipur. However, the wine was forbidden to the Nazir on Erev Shabbos too. Beis Hillel says that it's an Eiruv. Although it's not fit for the person you're making it for, it's fit for others.

31) Chananya held that Beis Shammai didn't allow making an Eiruv unless you take out your bed and all items needed for Shabbos to the place you want to establish your T'chum.

32) Sumchos held that a non-Kohain can't make an Eiruv with Trumah since it's not fit for him to eat, but a Nazir can make an Eiruv with wine since he can ask a Chachum to annul his oath of Neziros and he'll be fit to drink the wine. Although you can also ask a Chachum to annul the separation of Trumah [Tosfos: as long as it didn't come into the Kohain's hands yet]; however, if he annuls it, then it returns to being Tevel (and you still can't eat it). You can't say that he can separate the Trumah from that piece, since he holds like the Rabanan of Rebbi who held that you can't do a rabbinically Shabbos prohibition, (like separating Trumah), during Bein Hashmashes. [Tosfos: however, it's not a problem for the Nazir asking a Chachum then, since it's permitted to ask a Chachum to annul oaths L'chatchila that have ramifications for Shabbos, like to allow him to drink wine.] However, Rebbi can hold that you can then separate the Trumah and Maasar from the Eiruv itself, but you can't take it off from other produce that you own, since you're only allowed to separate Trumah and Maasar from produce that surrounds the produce you're separating for. [Tosfos explains; although we find a Heter to separate Trumah not from surrounding fruit when you're separating it Bein Hashmashes Erev Shabbos, that's only to make sure that you have fruit to eat on Shabbos, but not because you want to save your Eiruv.] However, this is only if you're still left with two meals' worth of Chulin food after you make the separation. [Tosfos explains: this is even if the Eiruv is technically acquired whenever the first second of Shabbos is, (so it's definitely Shabbos when the Eiruv comes into effect, whenever that happens to be, and you shouldn't be able to do rabbinical prohibitions); still, they never decreed those prohibitions until it's recognized by all that it's already night.

Also, this is only applicable by things that are permitted to others, plus, it could be permitted to you if you want to do so. However, things that are forbidden to all, like Tevel and Hekdesh, you can't make them into an Eiruv even if you can make it permitted by separating the Trumah and Maasar, or ask a Chachum to annul your oath that made it Hekdesh.]

33) According to Sumchos who holds that you need the Eiruv to be fit for the person who's making it; you may then make an Eiruv for a sick or old man with the Shiur of two meals that are fit for them, (though it smaller than meals for other people). However, a glutton only needs the Shiur of the meals of average people since his intent that it's not enough for it to be a meal is null against what all other people think. [Tosfos has two sides whether the Rabanan argue and they need an old or sick person to have the same Shiur as other people; or not since they allow what's fit for others when it's lenient, but when it's a Chumra, of course they can be lenient and rely on what's fit for themselves.]

34) A Kohain may make an Eiruv in a Beis Hapras (a field that had a grave and was plowed, that we're afraid that the plow disturbed the grave and there might be small bones all over the field). After all, Shmuel says that someone can blow the dirt of a Beis Hapras (checking if there is a small bone there) and pass through. [Tosfos says: they only permitted this regarding eating the Korban Pesach, despite that there is a Kareis if he eats it when he's Tamai, still they allowed it since there is a Kareis for not bringing it. However, they don't allow a Kohain to pass it this way to eat Trumah since there is a heavenly death penalty if he eats it when Tamai, (and there is no pressing reason to do so like by the Korban Pesach). However, a Kohain can pass it without worrying he'll transgress becoming Tamai since it's only a Lav if he did, the rabbis didn't prevent him from passing in this way if he needs to get by to do a Mitzva.] R' Yehuda says that a trampled Beis Hapras is Tahor since we assume that any bone that was the size of a barley is now less than a barley size (and can't make anything Tamai).

35) R' Yehuda permits a Kohain to make an Eiruv in a cemetery since he can go in there in a box (that will protect him from Tumah) to access his Eiruv since he holds a moving Ohel (tent) is considered an Ohel to protect from Tumah. The Rabanan say that it's not a good Eiruv since they don't consider moving Ohels as a proper Ohel. [Tosfos explains (see Mahrsha): the argument is if the box is being dragged on the ground, or wheeled in; but everyone agrees that a box that was thrown in is not a good Ohel, just like a bird is not an Ohel.]

36) [Tosfos says: although we see that kids rode on doors on the back of animals to protect from Tumah; we must say the ones who say that moving Ohels are not Ohels, they must agree with R' Yehuda there that they only rode on the backs of the animal, which is considered an Ohel and protects from Tumah even when moving, and that's only because there is a Gezeiras Hakasuv by an animal to consider it as an Ohel, as it says "its bones and sinews covers me." Rashba says they can even hold that they rode on the doors, and the argument is if the Ohel is carried by a person or utensils, but not if carried by animals, or non-utensils like rocks, as the Mishna in Ohelos says.]

Daf 31

37) If you place an Eiruv on a solitary grave (i.e., not in a cemetery) [Tosfos: and although the grave rabbinically makes Tamai four Amos around it, but that's only when there is nothing separating you from it, but here the box can act as a separation to remind you not to touch the grave, even if it's not a Halachic Ohel]; even so, the Rabanan hold that it's not a good Eiruv. This is even if he can retrieve it without becoming Tamai, like with a flat wooden utensil that's not susceptible to Tumah [Tosfos: that's not wide enough to place items on, or it doesn't both facilitate humans and their utensils, or else they are rabbinically susceptible to Tumah], and it doesn't have a circumference of a Tefach and won't make a Ohel to bring Tumah. It's even if it's Trumah that wasn't Muchsher yet (and can't become Tamai) that the Kohain can retrieve it without becoming Tamai and can still eat the Trumah. The reason it's still not a good Eiruv; since you can't make an Eiruv on top of something that's forbidden to partake pleasure from, like a grave. Although you can only make an Eiruv for a Mitzva, and Mitzvos weren't given to have pleasure from.; but since he's happy that the grave will be a guarded place to leave his food after the Eiruv takes effect, it's a pleasure without a Mitzvah. However, R' Yehuda who permits hold that he doesn't care that the food is guarded after the Eiruv takes effect.

38) You can make an Eiruv with Damai [Tosfos: even according to Sumchos who holds that it needs to be fit for you to eat, and it can't be an EIruv just because it's permitted to the army and to the poor. Even if it's it's exactly two meals' worth that you can't just separate the Trumah and Maasar, which everyone allow separating Trumah and Maasar of Damai Bein Hashmashes; since you won't have a Shiur of Chulin left.] This is because: you have the ability to make your property Hefker and you'll be poor and be permitted to eat it.

39) You can make an Eiruv with Maasar Rishon that was taken off before the produce was made into a smooth pile when you separate the Trumas Maasar from it, even if Trumah Gedolah wasn't taken. However, if you separated it when it was already made into a smoothed pile, it's not permitted until you also separate Trumah Gedolah from it [Tosfos: even though it's not established yet to obligate in separating Trumah and Maaasar until it's brought into the house].

40) You can make an Eiruv with Maasar Sheini and Hekdesh that was redeemed properly even if they didn't add an extra fifth, since missing the extra fifth doesn't prevent people from eating it. However, if they weren't redeemed properly, like when you redeemed Maasar Sheini on a token (without a minted figure), and Hekdesh on land, they're still forbidden and you can't make an Eiruv with them. You also can't make an Eiruv with Tevel, even if it's only rabbinically Tevel, like it was planted in a flowerpot without any holes.

41) If you send an Eiruv with a deaf mute, insane person or minor, or with a Kusi (who disagrees wit the concept of Eiruv); it's not an Eiruv. However, it's only not an Eiruv T'chumim with a minor, [Rashi explains since he can't make the acquisition to acquire the place he'll be resting. Tosfos asks: according to him, it seems that if he could acquire, that he'll be believed to make the Eiruv; yet, we say later that if we don't see him deliver it to the adult, we can't believe him that he did. Also, it seems in Meila that an Eiruv can be made by a monkey or elephant, so it's not a problem of making an acquisition. Rather Tosfos explains: since there is an Asmachta from the Pasuk, we don't believe him that he placed the EIruv correctly. In Meila, it refers to a case where you watched the animal place down the Eiruv and you didn't rely on it to bring it there on their own accord.] However, a minor can make an Eiruv Chatzeiros.

42) [Tosfos says: he's only not believed when he makes an Eiruv for others since he might give up in the middle, but he's believed he made an Eiruv for himself, like he's believed to examine his own house for Chametz. This is also found in the Yerushalmi.]

43) If you send the Eiruv in the hands of the above people, and you tell someone to receive the Eiruv from them and place it on the right place, and you watch the sane adult take it from them, you can assume that the adult placed it in the right place, and you don't worry that he wouldn't accept to finish the job, since we have the assumption (Chazaka) that an agent will do what he was sent to do, [Tosfos: even when the sender didn't rely on him completely, like here, where the minor did the first leg of the job]. This is also true if you gave it to a trained monkey or elephant, and you saw it bring it to the sane adult. [Tosfos: however, you can't rely on them to bring it there themselves.]

44) R' Nachman says: we only rely on the assumption that an agent will do what he was sent to do by a rabbinical Mitzva, but not for a Torah law. R' Sheishes says that we may rely on them in all cases, even if it's for Mitzvos from the Torah.

Daf 32

45) Everyone agrees that the people far from Yerushalayim may eat Chodush after noon on the second day of Pesach since we can assume that the Omer was brought then. Even R' Nachman who doesn't assume that a regular agent will do his job, but Beis Din will make sure of it. Not only that, even though they have the whole day to bring it, they would make sure to have it ready by noon, since they know that the people far away are relying on them to finish it before noon.

46) Also, everyone agrees that women who gave birth, or Zavos, (who can't eat Kodshim until after their bird Korbanos are brought), may eat Kodshim the night after they brought the money for their Korbanos, since we have a Chazaka (assumption) that the Beis Din of Kohanim don't leave until all the money brought for bird Korbanos run out.

47) If someone hears a Talmid Chachum say to an ignoramus to collect figs from his figs, and the one who overheard knows that they're Tevel; Rebbi held that he may eat from it, since he can assume that the Talmid Chachum separated the Trumah and Maasar from them after he gave permission. R' Shimon b. Gamliel says that he must separate Trumah and Maasar since we can assume it's still definite Tevel since the Talmid Chachum wouldn't transgress separating Trumah and Maasar from fruit that's not surrounding these fruits. Rebbi allows this even according to those who can't rely on an agent doing his job for Torah Mitzvos. [Tosfos explains: although it's only a rabbinical decree to separate Trumah from figs, but since the concept of Trumah and Maasar is from the Torah, we treat it like Torah law.] (Also, this would be true even to R' Shimon b. Gamliel, since he would have agreed to Rebbi if there wasn't a transgression to separate Trumah when the fruits aren't near each other.) After all, the owner definitely separated Trumah and Maasar since there is a Chazaka that a Talmid Chachum won't give something over to others to eat that's not allowed to be eaten.

48) Although it's forbidden to separate Trumah and Maasar from fruit that's not next to these fruits, Rebbi holds that it's better for a person to transgress a smaller prohibition than for his friend to transgress a bigger prohibition (i.e, eating Tevel). [Tosfos says: although we forbid someone to do the rabbinical prohibition of removing a loaf from an oven in order to save his friend from the Torah prohibition of baking on Shabbos; that's because the person was negligent by putting the dough in the oven. However, here the ignoramus wasn't negligent at all. Although we allow the master to transgress freeing his female half slave that's having Z'nus (which seems to be negligence); since we don't consider it really their fault (and is not negligence). After all, since she's forbidden to everyone, she's conspiring to find someone to do Znus with and she'll eventually convince people to do it with her. Alternatively, since she's making men stumble, we consider it a public Mitzvah to free her, (which supersedes freeing slaves). However, we can't answer because the owner is causing the Am Ha'aretz to sin, since we find they allow this even if the friend isn't the cause of the worse sin. As we see that they allow to bring the Korbanos of someone who was Tamai on Erev Pesach after the Tamid, which we're forbidden to bring any Korban after the Tamid, so that his friend can bring the Korban Pesach that is more stringent since it has a punishment of Kareis involved. Also, we allow a Kohain to bite off a wart from another Kohain on Shabbos so that he wouldn't be blemished and could do the Avoda.]

49) [Rash from Pulrira Paskins like R' Sheishes (that you can always rely that your agent did his job) since the Bahag says that we Paskin like R' Sheishes when he argues with R' Nachman in prohibitions (i.e., non-monetary matters), and like R' Nachman by monetary matters. However, R' Tam Paskins like R' Nachman since we find instances that we don't always say an agent did his job, like we say that we don't assume he delivers a Get, nor that he Shechted or he separated Trumah. However, the Ri rejects this proof. Over here, they argue by a case that, if the agent doesn't do his job, they'll rely on him and they'll stumble on a sin. However, in the above cases, the agent doesn't feel compelled to do it, since it will be noticeable that it wasn't done. After all, the woman won't remarry if she didn't receive the Get, and the owner will not eat the animal or the fruits when he sees that the animal wasn't Shechted and the fruits hadn't been separated. It would never have dawned on him that a third party will overhear the command and come to Shecht it or separate Trumah, and the owner will find it in that stage.]

50) If you place an Eiruv Tchumim in a tree above ten Tefachim from the ground, but you want to acquire the space on the bottom of the tree trunk (and you need to be in a place where you can access the Eiruv); if it's in the outskirts of the city (i.e, within the first seventy and two-thirds Amos) the Eiruv is valid. After all, we view the whole city and its outskirts as if it's one area (like a big Reshus Hayachid), and you're in the same area as your Eiruv. Even if it's outside the outskirts, if the Eiruv is within four Amos of where you want to rest, the Eiruv is also valid. As we view the four Amos of where you want to rest as if it's a Reshus Hayachid and as if the Eiruv is in the same area as your resting place.

However, if the tree has a branch that grows horizontally until its out of your four Amos, it's not an Eiruv according to the Rabanan who hold that you can't do a rabbinical prohibition Bein Hashmashes (when the Eiruv takes effect). Since he can't access the Eiruv Bein Hashmashes where he rests, since it's forbidden to carry it there.

Daf 33

49b) Even according to Rebbi who permits a rabbinical prohibition, you can find that it's not a valid Eiruv if, after it bends, it grows vertically again until it's a Reshus Hayachid; [Tosfos explains: either it's now grows ten Tefachim up or even if it doesn't, we can view as if the sides of the trunk extends down and makes it as if it's ten Tefachim tall. Although we usually don't view the Mechitza as if it extends down if young goats can walk underneath it, we must say the case is that ther is some blockage directly underneath it that prevents goats from walking there.] It also must be that the branch is exactly nine Tefachim high and the public uses it to rest their packages on, which makes it a Reshus Harabim. Therefore, there is no way to bring the Eiruv over without transgressing carrying from the Torah. [Rashi explains: even if you want to bring it to the top of the tree which is over the place where he's resting, and then we'll consider it in the same place where he's resting, it's still not valid. After all, he can't do that since he's carrying it over the branch that's a Reshus Harabim, and it's a Melacha to carry from one Reshus Hayachid to another over a Reshus Harabim. Tosfos asks: but why can't he throw it over to the tree top, since you're only Chayiv for carrying from one Reshus Hayachid to another over a Reshus Harabim, and not by throwing. The Ri answers: We don't validate an Eiruv with two 'sinces,' i.e., since he can bring it from the outer branch to the tree top, and then we'll say since it's within four Amos, it's like it's in the same place where you're resting.

Tosfos concludes: although there are ways that you can contrive to bring it to the trunk's base that's not a Torah prohibition, like if one picks it up off the branch and passes it to someone else, and the second person places it by the base. Or, if he stands on a top branch, and he takes the Eiruv and places it on his shoulder, or on his other hand to make a Hanacha in a Makom Patur, and then places it by the base. However, since it's close to transgressing a Torah prohibition through this, even Rebbi doesn't permit it Bein Hashmashes.]

51) However, if the branch is not a Reshus Harabim, the Eiruv would be valid according to Rebbi. [Rashi explains since you can carry the Eiruv from the branch to the tree top without carrying it over a Reshus Harabim. However, Ri (who would hold that to be two 'sinces') explains: since you can take it off the top of the branch to the horizontal part of the branch, and from there, you can place it by the trunk's base.]

52) [Rashi says: if the Eiruv was on the branch below ten Amos, even if it's outside four Amos (Tosfos even if it's many Amos away); Rebbi would say it's a good Eiruv since you can carry the Eiruv to the tree's base less than four Amos at a time. Tosfos quotes Marai that you can bring it at one time since you made the Akira (i.e., picked it off) a Karmulos.]

53) If you hang a basket on a tree that's not four Tefachim thick, [Tosfos: for, if it would be four Tefachim thick, the basket will be a hole that's open to a Reshus Hayachid that has the status of a Reshus Hayachid], and you place the Eiruv into it; Rebbi holds it to be a valid Eiruv. After all, it's only rabbinically forbidden to use a tree on Shabbos, and Rebbi permits doing it Bein Hashamashes. However, the Rabanan would forbid it if they would hold that anything suspended on the side of a tree is forbidden to use on Shabbos.

54) If he holds like R' Yehuda that all Eiruvs that are above ten Tefachim from the ground needs to be on a four Tefachim surface, (but if it's within ten, it's considered as being on the floor); we must say that the case is that the basket combines to the tree's width to make a four Tefachim area. [Tosfos explains: that's only when the bottom of the basket is within three Tefachim to the top of the tree, but if it's further than that, then it's not an Eiruv] unless you hold like R' Meir that we view as if the tree is chiseled and as if it has a surface of four Tefachim. [Tosfos explains: although it's wide four on top, it doesn't become a Reshus Hayachid, according to Rashi, as long as it's not four wide on the bottom. However, Tosfos held that, even if it's not wide four on the bottom, even a three Tefachim wide tree would block the coming of the young goats in order to say that the walls extend down to make a Reshus Hayachid; we need to say that it's not three Tefachim by its base either.] Even according to R' Yossi b. Yehuda who says that even a basket on a reed is a Reshus Hayachid; that's only when the walls of the basket surround the reed, but here the basket is on the side of the tree.

55) R' Yirmiya allows an Eiruv even when the tree is four Tefachim wide, since you can tilt the hanging basket so that it will be within ten Tefachim from the ground and take it. [Rashbam explains: since he holds that anything that's in the same utensil is attached, and part of the basket is still above ten, so the Eiruv being tilted in the part of the basket that's below ten is not considered as carrying it out. However, now that it's within ten, you may take it out to the Reshus Harabim. However, Tosfos explains: even if we don't consider all the items in a utensil is attached; still, since the Eiruv is on the mouth of the basket, which is within ten Tefachim, it's resting in a Karmulas. So, since the Eiruv is not in a Reshus Hayachid, you may take the Eiruv to you in the Reshus Harabim.]

56) The Gemara asks: if so, that it's an Eiruv as long as you have the ability to bring it to where you're resting; why does the Mishna (talking about Yom Tov before Shabbos) requires you to take the Eiruv out of your house in the first place? After all, you're allowed to bring it to your place of rest Bein Hashmashes. [Rashi explains that this question is even applicable to making an Eiruv on Shabbos, since it's not an Issur Torah since you can carry it less than four Amos at a time. The Gemara only asked from Yom Tov since that's the only time the Mishna says explicitly that you should bring it to the place you're resting. However, Tosfos asks: but how can you carry it out of your house since it's carrying it out to a Reshus Harabim? Even if you say that you took it out to the Reshus Harabim on Friday afternoon; still, if you're resting in a Reshus Hayachid, you would need to carry in from a Reshus Harabim to a Reshus Hayachid. Even if you say that you're resting in a Reshus Harabim, perhaps even Rebbi doesn't allow carrying less than four Amos at a time Bein Hashmashes since it's very close for someone to come to a Issur Torah. Therefore, Tosfos concludes: the question is only why you need to carry it to your resting place on Yom Tov.]

The Gemara answers: they made a decree to always carry it out to the resting place because you might not carry it to your resting place when Yom Tov falls out after Shabbos (when you can't carry Bein Hashmashes). [Tosfos adds: the Gemara could have answered that they decreed Yom Tov because you may not carry it to your resting place on Shabbos, like we find in Beitza that we decree Toiveling utensils on Yom Tov since you might come to Toivel them on Shabbos and carry it four Amos in Reshus Harabim to bring it to the Mikvah; however, the Gemara held that it was more apt to decree yom Tov because of another Yom Tov that falls out after Shabbos. Alternatively, Eiruv is so lenient, we shouldn't decree Yom Tov because of Shabbos like we would usually. Therefore, they only felt to decree this on Yom Tov because of a Yom Tov that falls out after Shabbos.]

Daf 34

57) If you want to have your place of rest on top of a closet that's in the Reshus Harabim, and the Eiruv is within ten Tefachim, [Rashi: or it's in the closet, or it's in the wall next to the closet], it's not a valid Eiruv. [Tosfos explains: we must say it refers to a case where the Eiruv is on a surface that's nine Tefachim high and the public rests their packages there, which makes it a Reshus Harabim (like Rashi's second explanation, and not like his first); or else it would be a Karmulas, which you can carry from to a Reshus Hayachid Bein Hashmashes, since we see that our Gemara holds like Rebbi. We also must say that you're Chayiv even when the object doesn't move over the airspace of a Reshus Harabim, like you lift it up off that ledge over ten Tefachim so that you will move it afterwards in the airspace above ten Tefachim to the top of the closet, which is not the Reshus Harabim's airspace. However, if you say that you're not Chayiv in that case, you need to say that it's in a case where you can only carry it through the airspace of the Reshus Harabim; i.e., it's blocked on the top, and it can only be brought to the top of the closet through a window in the closet.]

The reason that we don't say that you can bring the Eiruv to the top of the closet if you can tip the closet, and the top of the closet is now on the floor, and you can bring the Eiruv there; we must refer to a closet that's nailed in and can't be tipped. Alternatively, that it was four Amos tall, and when you tip it, it goes out of its four Amos. [Tosfos explains: and you can't bring the EIruv there since you would need to carry it four Amos, and even Rebbi doesn't permit carrying it less than four Amos at a time, as we explained. Alternatively, like Rashi explains; that since it's not within four Amos of the original resting place, it's like you removed the closet from its place and put it in another place, and we don't say in this case that it should be a good Eiruv since I could have moved the closet to another area.]

58) We must say that the case is; that the Eiruv wasn't tied with a rope that you were holding the other side on top of the closet, since it's considered as it's all connected, and part of that contraption is in your hand; it's not an Issur Torah to bring it to you, and Rebbi would allow pulling the rest to you Bein Hashmashes.

59) If you put an Eiruv in a pit that's a hundred Amos deep, even if you intend to rest on the edge of the pit [Tosfos: i.e., four Amos away, or else we consider anything within four Amos as if it's in one place]; it's a valid Eiruv if the edge is a Karmulas like Rebbi who permits carrying to there during Bein Hashmashes. However, if it would be a Reshus Harabim, it wouldn't be an Eiruv, since it would take a Issur Torah to carry it to the resting place.