Eruvin 209:1

אמר רבי יוחנן ושניהם מקרא אחד דרשו (דברי הימים ב כט, טז) ויבאו הכהנים לפנימה בית ה' לטהר ויוציאו את כל הטומאה אשר מצאו בהיכל ה' לחצר בית ה' ויקבלו הלוים להוציא לנחל קדרון חוצה

- R'Johanan retorted:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So according to Rashi. Tosaf. (a.l.) regards R. Johanan's submission as an independent statement.');">¹</span> Both<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Simeon b. Nanus and R. Akiba who, in fact, agree that one who takes a creeping thing into the Temple incurs guilt, and Only differ on the question of taking it out when it was already within the Temple (cf. Rashi) .');">²</span> expounded this same<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'one'.');">³</span>

מר סבר מדאשתני בעזרה בלוים טומאה בעזרה ליכא

text: And the priests went in unto the inner part of the house of the Lord,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the Hekal.');">⁴</span> to cleanse it, and brought out all the uncleanness that they found in the Temple of the Lord into the court of the house of the Lord. And the Levites took it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the 'court' into which the priests had carried it.');">⁵</span>

ומר סבר עד היכא דלא אפשר בלוים מפקי כהנים השתא דאפשר בלוים תו לא מטמאי כהנים

to carry it out abroad to the brook Kidron.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Chron. XXIX, 16.');">⁶</span> One Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Simeon b. Nanus.');">⁷</span> holds that since in the court there was a change over<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the priests (who brought it from the Hekal) .');">⁸</span>

תנו רבנן הכל נכנסין בהיכל לבנות לתקן ולהוציא את הטומאה ומצוה בכהנים אם אין שם כהנים נכנסין לוים אין שם לוים נכנסין ישראלים ואידי ואידי טהורין אין טמאין לא

to the Levites<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And not to a relay of priests, though (if more helpers were required) it might have been expected that priests should complete the task their fellows had begun.');">⁹</span> there can be no prohibition against allowing uncleanness to remain for some time in the court,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'uncleanness In court there is not'. As in this case it was only from the 'inner parts that the priests had to remove the uncleanness while the removal from the court was relegated to the Levites, because the defilement of their bodies was not so grave a matter as that of the priests, so also in the case of the Sabbath, wherever the uncleanness is in the court, the degree of transgression must be reduced to a minimum and not even a shebuth may be abrogated.');">¹⁰</span> while the other Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Akiba.');">¹¹</span>

אמר רב הונא רב כהנא מסייע כהני דתני רב כהנא מתוך שנאמר (ויקרא כא, כג) אך אל הפרוכת לא יבא יכול לא יהו כהנים בעלי מומין נכנסין בין האולם ולמזבח לעשות ריקועי פחים

holds that up to the point<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'until where'.');">¹²</span> where it was impossible for the Levites to attend<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. in the Hekal whither Levites are not allowed to enter.');">¹³</span> the priests had to carry the uncleanness out, but where<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'now'.');">¹⁴</span>

תלמוד לומר אך חלק מצוה בתמימים אין שם תמימים נכנסין בעלי מומין מצוה בטהורין אין שם טהורין נכנסין טמאין אידי ואידי כהנים אין ישראלים לא

it could be done by the Levites the priests could no longer defile themselves.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' No proof, therefore, can be adduced from here that uncleanness may be allowed to remain in the Temple court until dusk.');">¹⁵</span> Our Rabbis taught: All may enter the Hekal to build, to repair or to take out uncleanness. It is a religious duty, however, that the priests should do it.

איבעיא להו טמא ובעל מום איזו מהן נכנס רב חייא בר אשי אמר רב טמא נכנס דהא אישתרי בעבודת ציבור ר' אלעזר אומר בעל מום נכנס דהא אישתרי באכילת קדשים:

If no priests are available<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'if there are no priests there'.');">¹⁶</span> Levites may enter. If no Levites are available Israelites may enter.

רבי שמעון אומר וכו': רבי שמעון היכא קאי התם קאי דתנן מי שהחשיך חוץ לתחום אפילו אמה אחת לא יכנס ר' שמעון אומר אפי' חמש עשרה אמה יכנס לפי שאין המשוחות ממצעין את המדות מפני הטועים

But in all these cases<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and these and those'.');">¹⁷</span> only levitically clean persons may enter.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'yes'.');">¹⁸</span> Those who are levitically unclean may not.

דקאמר תנא קמא לא יכנס ואמר ליה רבי שמעון יכנס:

R'Huna observed: R'Kahana lends his support to the priests,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Kahane', a play upon the Aramaic equivalent of 'priests' and the name of R. 'Kahana'. In the following exposition R. Kahana gives precedence 'to unclean priests over clean Israelites.');">¹⁹</span> for R'Kahana learned: Since it was said: Only he shall not go in unto the veil,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 23, which deals with priests who are afflicted with a blemish.');">²⁰</span> it might have been assumed that priests who have a blemish must not enter between the Ulam and the altar to make the beaten plates.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of gold; wherewith the interior of the Holy of Holies was overlaid.');">²¹</span>

שלא התירו לך אלא משום שבות: היכא קאי התם קאי דקאמר תנא קמא קושרה ואמר ליה רבי שמעון

hence it was explicitly stated: 'Only' i.e., draw a distinction:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The expression 'only' (ak or rub) in a Scriptural text always signifies some exclusion, viz., it is in this case only that entry for the purposes mentioned is not invariably forbidden.');">²²</span> Thus the commandment is that those who are without blemish are qualified, but if men without a blemish are unavailable those with blemishes may enter; the commandment is that those who are levitically clean may enter, but if no men who are levitically clean are available those who are levitically unclean may enter; but in all these cases<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and these and those'.');">²³</span> priests only may enter but no Israelites.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which shows that R. Kahana gives preference to disfigured or levitically unclean priests over sound and clean Israelites.');">²⁴</span>

עונבה עניבה דלא אתי לידי חיוב חטאת שרו ליה רבנן קשירה דאתי לידי חיוב חטאת לא שרו ליה רבנן:

The question was raised: In the case of one who is levitically unclean and another who has a blemish, who of these is to enter?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If no other person for the work is obtainable.');">²⁵</span> - R'Hiyya B'Ashi citing Rab replied: The levitically unclean person shall enter, since he has been declared permitted to take part in the public Temple service.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When all the congregation is levitically unclean. As a priest who is afflicted with a blemish is not allowed to participate even then the former obviously takes precedence.');">²⁶</span> R'Eleazar replied: The man who has the blemish shall enter, since he has been declared permitted to eat consecrated food.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While all unclean priest is not (cf.prev.n.mut.mut.) .');">²⁷</span>

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך המוצא תפילין וסליקא לה מסכת עירובין</strong></big><br><br>

R'SIMEON SAID etc. What does R'Simeon refer to?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'where does he stand'?');">²⁸</span> - He refers to a previous statement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'there he stands'.');">²⁹</span> where we learned: If a man was overtaken by dusk even when only One cubit outside the Sabbath limit, he may not enter it. R'Simeon ruled: Even if he was fifteen cubits away he may enter, since the surveyors do not measure exactly on account of those who might err.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 52b, q.v. notes.');">³⁰</span> The first Tanna having thus ruled: 'he may not enter', R'Simeon said to him, 'He may enter'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since even when the man is fifteen cubits away from the Sabbath limit he is already within it. The Sages have thus merely given back what they had previously taken away.');">³¹</span> SINCE THEY HAVE ONLY PERMITTED YOU THAT WHICH IS FORBIDDEN AS SHEBUTH. What does he refer to?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He could not refer to the cited case of Sabbath limit since the question of shebuth does not come there into consideration.');">³²</span> - He refers to another Statement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'there he stands'.');">²⁹</span> where the first Tanna ruled that it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The string of a levitical harp that was broken in the Temple on the Sabbath.');">³³</span> may be tied up,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 102b.');">³⁴</span> in connection with which R'Simeon said to him:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In his statement in the Baraitha.');">³⁵</span> He may Only secure it with a loop; Only a loop which cannot involve one in the obligation of a sin-offering did the Rabbis permit,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'which does not come to the hands of. . him'.');">³⁶</span> but a knot which might involve one in the obligation of a sin-offering the Rabbis did not permit.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Simeon says in effect, 'Though I relaxed the law in the case of the Sabbath limit I do not allow a knot to be made in a broken harp string, since only in the former case can the argument he advanced that the Sages have merely given back what they had previously taken away' (cf. Tosaf. and Rashi a.l.) . ');">³⁷</span>