Commentary for Eruvin 51:10

במאי קמיפלגי מר סבר עיירות בינוניות הויין בית כור ומ"ס מ' סאה הויין

Now [have not the screens protecting] the cattle ditches the same status as a partition intended to [protect objects] put [beside it]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of course they have; and this is the reason why they were invalid though they were permanent fixtures. Similarly in the case of the hall in the orchard, since it was put up for the purpose of protecting objects deposited within it and not as a dwelling, the movement of objects in the orchard enclosure around it should consequently be forbidden. Again an objection against Raba (v. Supra p. 178, n. 2) . The interpretation of the ohbutdv ,cua, grvk tuvv passage here adopted follows the lines of (v. Rashi s.v. 26a) . Cf. Rashi's interpretation and Tosaf. s.v. 25b.');">¹⁴</span> The exilarch, thereupon, applied to them the Scriptural text: They are wise to do evil,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Allusion to their destruction of R. Huna b. Hinena's work, which deprived the exilarch and his party from the use of the banqueting hall on that day.');">¹⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Eruvin 51:10. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.