Eruvin 190

ובסכנה מכסן והולך לו

IN A TIME OF DANGER,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. in a time of religious persecution when it is dangerous to be seen in the vicinity of ritual objects (v. infra 97a f) .');">¹</span> HOWEVER, HE SHALL COVER THEM AND PROCEED ON HIS WAY. R'SIMEON RULED: HE SHALL.

רבי שמעון אומר נותנן לחבירו וחבירו לחבירו עד שמגיע לחצר החיצונה

PASS THEM TO HIS FELLOW AND HIS FELLOW SHALL PASS THEM TO HIS FELLOW, AND SO ON,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Each person carrying the tefillin a lesser distance than four cubits.');">²</span> UNTIL THE OUTERMOST COURTYARD<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the nearest town; sc. a place of safety.');">³</span> IS REACHED.

וכן בנו נותנו לחבירו וחבירו לחבירו אפילו מאה רבי יהודה אומר נותן אדם חבית לחבירו וחבירו לחבירו אפילו חוץ לתחום אמרו לו לא תהלך זו יותר מרגלי בעליה:

THE SAME PROCEDURE IS TO BE FOLLOWED IN THE CASE OF A CHILD OF HIS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who was born on the Sabbath in an open field.');">⁴</span> HE PASSES HIM TO HIS FELLOW AND HIS FELLOW PASSES HIM TO HIS FELLOW, AND SO ON,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra n. 11 mut. mut.');">⁵</span> EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE AS MANY AS A HUNDRED MEN.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> זוג אחד אין טפי לא לימא תנן סתמא דלא כרבי מאיר

R'JUDAH RULED: A MAN MAY PASS A JAR TO HIS FELLOW AND HIS FELLOW MAY PASS IT TO HIS FELLOW EVEN BEYOND THE SABBATH LIMIT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra n. 11 mut. mut.');">⁵</span> THEY,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Rabbis who, disagreed with him.');">⁶</span> HOWEVER, SAID TO HIM: THIS MUST NOT BE MOVED FURTHER THAN THE FEET OF ITS OWNER.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. beyond his Sabbath limit.');">⁷</span>

דאי כרבי מאיר האמר לובש כל מה שיכול ללבוש ועוטף כל מה שיכול לעטוף דתנן ולשם מוציא כל כלי תשמישו ולובש כל מה שיכול ללבוש ועוטף כל מה שיכול לעטוף

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Only ONE PAIR AT A TIME,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' May be carried in.');">⁸</span> but not more. Must it then be assumed that we learned here an anonymous Mishnah that is not in agreement with R'Meir?

וההיא סתמא ממאי דרבי מאיר היא דקתני עלה לובש ומוציא ופושט ולובש ומוציא ופושט אפילו כל היום כולו דברי ר"מ

For if it were to be maintained that it was in agreement with R'Meir [the objection would arise:] Did he not rule that a man may<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When saving from a fire on the Sabbath.');">⁹</span> put on all the clothes that he can put on and he may wrap himself in all things that he can wrap round himself? For we learned: And thither<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The nearest courtyard beyond the reach of the fire.');">¹⁰</span>

אמר רבא אפילו תימא רבי מאיר התם דרך מלבושו כחול שוויה רבנן והכא דרך מלבושו כחול שוויה רבנן

he may carry out all the utensils he is in the habit of using, and he may put on all the clothes that he is able to put on and he may wrap himself in all things that he can wrap round himself.' But whence the proof that that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Shab. 120a.');">¹¹</span> anonymous Mishnah represents the view of R'Meir? - Since in connection therewith it was stated: 'He may put on clothes and carry them out, and there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The nearest courtyard beyond the reach of the fire.');">¹⁰</span>

התם דבחול כמה דבעי לביש לענין הצלה נמי שרו ליה רבנן הכא דבחול נמי זוג אחד אין טפי לא לענין הצלה נמי זוג אחד אין טפי לא:

undress himself, and then he may again put on clothes and carry them out and undress himself, and so on, even all day long; so R'Meir'. Raba replied: It<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Our MISHNAH:');">¹²</span> may be said to be in agreement even with R'Meir, for there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where a man is engaged in saving clothes from a fire.');">¹³</span>

רבן גמליאל אומר שנים שנים: מאי קסבר אי קסבר שבת זמן תפילין הוא זוג אחד אין טפי לא

the Rabbis have allowed a procedure<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'made it'.');">¹⁴</span> similar to one's habit of dressing on a weekday and here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The case of tefillin.');">¹⁵</span> also they have allowed a procedure similar to one's way of wearing tefillin on a weekday.

ואי קסבר שבת לאו זמן תפילין הוא ומשום הצלה דרך מלבוש שרו ליה רבנן אפילו טפי נמי

There,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where a man is engaged in saving clothes from a fire.');">¹³</span> where on a weekday a man can wear as many clothes as he desires the Rabbis have permitted him to do so also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath.');">¹⁶</span> for the purpose of saving; but here,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The case of tefillin.');">¹⁵</span>

לעולם קסבר שבת לאו זמן תפילין הוא וכי שרו רבנן לענין הצלה דרך מלבוש במקום תפילין

where even on a weekday a man may wear only one pair but no more he was for the purpose of saving also permitted one pair only but no more. R'GAMALIEL RULED: TWO PAIRS AT A TIME. What is the view he upholds: If he holds that Sabbath is a time for wearing tefillin,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the reason why the tefillin may be carried on the Sabbath into a place of safety is that in any case they can be worn on that day as on a weekday.');">¹⁷</span>

אי הכי זוג אחד נמי אין טפי לא אמר רב שמואל בר רב יצחק מקום יש בראש להניח בו שתי תפילין

a man should be permitted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the commandment of tefillin requires.');">¹⁸</span> only one pair but no more; and if he holds that Sabbath is not a time for tefillin, but that for the purpose of saving them the Rabbis have permitted him to wear them in the manner of a raiment why<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since they are not worn in fulfilment of the commandment of tefillin.');">¹⁹</span> should he not be permitted to wear even more than one pair? - The fact is that he holds that Sabbath is not a time for the wearing of tefillin, but when the Rabbis have permitted to wear them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath.');">²⁰</span>

הניחא דראש דיד מאי איכא למימר

in the manner of a raiment for the purpose of saving they limited that to the spot<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the head between the eyes above the forehead and on the arm on the biceps muscle.');">²¹</span> prescribed for the position of the tefillin.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Many pairs of tefillin cannot obviously be accommodated thereon.');">²²</span> If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the nearest town; sc. a place of safety.');">³</span>

כדרב הונא דאמר רב הונא פעמים שאדם בא מן השדה וחבילתו על ראשו ומסלקן מראשו וקושרן בזרועו

should not one pair only<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'yes'. Cur. edd. 'also' is deleted by Bah.');">²⁴</span> be allowed but not more?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why then did R. Gamaliel allow two pairs at a time?');">²⁵</span> - R'Samuel son of R'Isaac replied: There is room enough on the head for laying two tefillin.

אימר דאמר רב הונא שלא ינהג בהן דרך בזיון ראוי מי אמר

This is a satisfactory explanation as regards those of the head; what explanations however, can be given in respect of those of the hand?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Not all the hand surely is a suitable place for the tefillin. Why then were two tefillin allowed?');">²⁶</span> - The same as that which R'Huna gave, for R'Huna explained: Sometimes a man comes from the field with his bundle on his head when<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a mark of respect for the tefillin.');">²⁷</span> he removes them from his head<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that they be not crushed by the bundle.');">²⁸</span>

אלא כדאמר רב שמואל בר רב יצחק מקום יש בראש שראוי להניח בו שתי תפילין הכא נמי מקום יש ביד שראוי להניח בו שתי תפילין

and binds them on his arm.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in this manner one would on a weekday wear two tefillin on his arm, a similar number was also allowed on the Sabbath for the purposes of saving.');">²⁹</span> It might still be contended, that R'Huna only intended that they should not be treated with disrespect;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that they be not crushed by the bundle.');">²⁸</span> did he, however, say that it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the wearing of two tefillin on one's arm.');">³⁰</span>

תנא דבי מנשה (דברים ו, ח) על ידך זו קיבורת בין עיניך זו קדקד היכא אמרי דבי רבי ינאי מקום שמוחו של תינוק רופס

was the proper [manner of wearing them] so.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As he did not say this, the question arises again: Why did R. Gamaliel allow two tefillin on the arm?');">³¹</span> - The explanation rather is this:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but'.');">³²</span> As R'Samuel son of R'Isaac stated: 'There is room enough on the head for laying two tefillin' so we may here also submit: There is room enough on the hand for laying two tefillin.

לימא בדרב שמואל בר רב יצחק קמיפלגי דת"ק לית ליה דרב שמואל בר רב יצחק ורבן גמליאל אית ליה דרב שמואל בר רב יצחק

It was taught at the school of Manasseh: Upon thy hand,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. VI, 8.');">³³</span> refers to the biceps muscle: between thine eyes,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. VI, 8.');">³³</span> refers to the vertex.

לא דכולי עלמא אית להו דרב שמואל בר רב יצחק והכא בשבת זמן תפילין קמיפלגי דת"ק סבר שבת זמן תפילין הוא

Where is this? - At the school of R'Jannai it was stated: on the place where a child's brain pulsates.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'is soft'.');">³⁴</span> Must it be assumed that they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Gamaliel and the first Tanna in our MISHNAH:');">³⁵</span> differ on the principle of R'Samuel son of R'Isaac, the first Tanna disagreeing with the view<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he has not');">³⁶</span>

ורבן גמליאל סבר שבת לאו זמן תפילין הוא

of R'Samuel son of R'Isaac<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence he allows only one pair at a time.');">³⁷</span> while R'Gamaliel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who allows two pairs.');">³⁸</span> upholds it?

ואיבעית אימא דכ"ע שבת זמן תפילין הוא והכא במצות צריכות כוונה קמיפלגי ת"ק סבר לצאת בעי כוונה

No, all may hold the view of R'Samuel son of R'Isaac, but the point at issue between them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Gamaliel and the first Tanna in our MISHNAH:');">³⁹</span> is whether the Sabbath is a time for tefillin, the first Tanna maintaining that Sabbath is a time for tefillin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Supra p. 660, n. 10. As the commandment is performed by the wearing of one pair, only one pair at a time may be worn.');">⁴⁰</span> while R'Gamaliel maintains that Sabbath is no time for tefillin.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the permissibility of carrying them into a place of safety is based on their suitability as ornaments. Hence his ruling that as ornaments two pairs at a time may also be worn.');">⁴¹</span>

ורבן גמליאל סבר לא בעי כוונה

And if you prefer I might reply that all agree that the Sabbath is a time for tefillin,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And also, that tefillin may be regarded as an ornament that may be worn on the Sabbath in a public domain.');">⁴²</span> but here the point at issue between them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Gamaliel and the first Tanna in our MISHNAH:');">³⁹</span> is whether the performance of commandments requires intention, the first Tanna holding that in order to discharge the duty of a commandment, intention is not<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is the reading according to MS.M. and Rashi's second interpretation. Cur. edd. 'is necessary'.');">⁴³</span> necessary<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, therefore, a man puts on tefillin he performs the commandment ipso facto. Consequently he may wear only one pair at a time. For, should he wear more than one pair, whatever his intention, he would be transgressing the prohibition against adding to the commandments (v. infra n. 13) .');">⁴⁴</span> while R'Gamaliel holds that intention is<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So with MS.M. and Rashi's second interpretation. Cur. edd., 'is not'.');">⁴⁵</span> necessary.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence it is possible to wear two pairs of tefillin as ornaments (cf. Supra n. 8) without transgressing the prohibition against 'adding to the commandments' (cf supra n. 10) .');">⁴⁶</span>