Reference for Eruvin 59:21
מערבין לנזיר ביין כו': מתני' דלא כב"ש דתניא ב"ש אומרים אין מערבין לנזיר ביין ולישראל בתרומה ב"ה אומרים מערבין לנזיר ביין ולישראל בתרומה אמרו להן ב"ה לב"ש אי אתם מודים
applies only where he said: "[I swear that I will not eat] this [loaf]" but if he said: "[This loaf shall be forbidden] to me, no 'erub from it may be prepared for him'? - R'Huna can answer you: What then [would you suggest? That] whenever a man said: '[This loaf shall be forbidden] to me' an erub from it may be prepared for him?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because it would be contended that this expression also implies the prohibition of eating only?');"><sup>46</sup></span> - [would not then] a difficulty [arise from] the first clause?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the final clause of the first clause ('This applies only when he said: " that="" l="" will="" not="" taste="" it="" ')="" from="" which="" was="" been="" inferred="" supra="" if="" a="" man="" used="" such="" an="" expression="" no="" 'erub="" for="" him="" may="" be="" prepared="" the="" forbidden="" loaf.');"=""><sup>47</sup></span> - A clause is missing<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Baraitha cited.');"><sup>42</sup></span> and this is the correct reading: If a man vowed to have no benefit from a loaf an 'erub from it may be prepared for him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the main purpose of a loaf is the eating of it, 'benefit' in respect of it can apply to eating only.');"><sup>48</sup></span> and even if he said: '[This loaf shall be forbidden] t me' it is the same as if he had said: '[I take] an oath that I shall not taste it'. At all events does not the contradiction, against R'Huna remain?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How could he, contrary to the ruling of the Baraitha, maintain that where a man 'forbade' a loaf to himself no 'erub from it may be prepared for him?');"><sup>49</sup></span> - He upholds the same view as R'Eliezer. For it was taught: R'Eliezer ruled, [If a man said: 'I take] all oath that I would not eat this ]oaf' 'erub from it may be prepared for him, [but if he said], 'This loaf [shall be forbidden] to me' no 'erub from it may be prepared for him. But could R'Eliezer have given such a ruling? Was it not in fact taught: 'This is the general rule: If a man imposed upon himself the prohibition of [a certain food] an erub from it may be prepared for him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The prohibition being limited to the man's action only, while the preparation of an 'erub is a mere benefit that involves no actual action on his part.');"><sup>50</sup></span> but if a certain food was forbidden to a man,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that the prohibition was not limited to the man's action but was imposed on the very object itself, including whatsoever benefit One may derive therefrom.');"><sup>51</sup></span> no 'erub from it may be prepared for him. R'Eliezer ruled: [If the man said,] "This loaf [shall be forbidden] to me", an 'erub from it may be prepared for him, but if he said: "This loaf shall be consecrated" no 'erub from it may be prepared for him, because no erub may be prepared from consecrated food'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first clause of R. Eliezer's ruling in this Baraitha is thus in direct contradiction to his ruling in the previous Baraitha. How then could it be maintained that he land down both rulings?');"><sup>52</sup></span> - [The two rulings represent the views of] two Tannas who differ as to what was the view<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and according'.');"><sup>53</sup></span> of R'Eliezer. AN 'ERUB MAY BE PREPARED FOR A NAZIRITE WITH WINE etc. Our Mishnah does not represent the view of Beth Shammai. For it was taught: Beth Shammai ruled: No 'erub may be prepared for a nazirite with wine<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because he is forbidden to consume it.');"><sup>54</sup></span> or for an Israelite with terumah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because he is forbidden to consume it.');"><sup>54</sup></span> and Beth Hillel ruled: An 'erub may be prepared for a nazirite with wine or for an Israelite with terumah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. notes on our Mishnah supra.');"><sup>55</sup></span> Sand Beth Hillel to Beth Shammai,'Do you not admit