Eruvin 79

Chapter 79

א אלא מחוץ לתחום אתא מאן דאכל סבר הבא בשביל ישראל זה מותר לישראל אחר
1 but it arrived<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the second day when it was served at the Exilarch's table.');"><sup>1</sup></span> from without the permitted festival limit. He who ate it was of the opinion that if anything arrived<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On a festival day from without the permitted limit.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב ומאן דלא אכל סבר כל דאתי לבי ריש גלותא אדעתא דכולהו רבנן אתי
2 for one Israelite it is permitted to another israelite,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the stag was brought for the Exilarch it was only forbidden to him but permitted to the Rabbis.');"><sup>3</sup></span> and he who did not eat it held that all foodstuffs that arrived at the Exilarch's house were intended for all the Rabbis.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who usually dined with him. They were, therefore, in the same position as the Exilarch himself.');"><sup>4</sup></span> but did not R'Shesheth meet Rabbah B'Samuel and ask him [a question on sanctities]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' What possible bearing could such a question have had on that of the stag that was served as a dish on the very day on which it arrived from without the permitted limit?');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ג והא אשכחיה רב ששת לרבה בר שמואל וא"ל לא היו דברים מעולם
3 - That in fact never happened.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the things never were'.');"><sup>6</sup></span> A load of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that'.');"><sup>7</sup></span> turnips once arrived at Mahuza [on a festival day].
ד ההוא ליפתא דאתי למחוזא נפק רבא חזיא דכמישא שרא רבא למיזבן מיניה אמר הא ודאי מאיתמול נעקרה
4 Raba went out and observed that they were withered. He therefore permitted the people to buy them, saying: 'These turnips were undoubtedly pulled out from the ground yesterday. What other objection could be raised?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Against eating them on the festival.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ה מאי אמרת מחוץ לתחום אתיא הבא בשביל ישראל זה מותר לאכול לישראל אחר וכל שכן האי דאדעתא דנכרים אתא
5 That they arrived from without the permitted festival limit? But anything that arrives for one Israelite is permitted to another Israelite to eat, and much more so are these [turnips permitted] since they were intended for gentiles'. When, however, he observed that [the gentile vendors] were bringing in additional supplies of these turnips he forbade all further buying.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to them', since it was evident that the new supplies were definitely intended for the Jewish public.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
ו כיון דחזא דקא מפשי ומייתי להו אסר להו:
6 Certain gardeners once cut<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'who cut'.');"><sup>10</sup></span> myrtles on the second day of the festival and Rabina permitted people to smell their odour in the evening immediately [after the termination of the festival]. Said Raba B'Tahlifa to Rabina, 'The Master should really forbid this to them since they are not learned men'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And might, as a result of the permission, allow themselves further relaxations in the observance of the sanctity of the second festival day.');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ז הנהו בני גננא דגזו להו אסא בי"ט שני לאורתא שרא להו רבינא לאורוחי ביה לאלתר א"ל רבא בר תחליפא לרבינא ליסר להו מר מפני שאינן בני תורה
7 To this R'Shemaiah demurred: 'Is the reason then<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why they should have been forbidden the smelling of the myrtles.');"><sup>12</sup></span> that they are not learned men, but if they had been learned men this would have been permitted? But, surely, is It not necessary [to allow time] enough<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the conclusion of the festival.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ח מתקיף לה רב שמעיה טעמא דאינן בני תורה הא בני תורה שרי והא בעינן בכדי שיעשו אזלו שיילוה לרבא אמר להו בעינן בכדי שיעשו:
8 for their preparation? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the cutting of the myrtles. Before such a period of time has passed the smelling remains forbidden but Rabina, surely, permitted it as soon as the festival concluded.');"><sup>14</sup></span> They, therefore, proceeded to ask this question of Raba, and he told then; that it was necessary [to allow time] enough<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the conclusion of the festival.');"><sup>13</sup></span> for their preparation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. previous note.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
ט ר' דוסא אומר העובר לפני התיבה כו':
9 R'DOSA<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Our Mishnah (supra 39a) insert B. HARKINAS.');"><sup>16</sup></span> RULED: THE PERSON WHO ACTS AS CONGREGATIONAL READER etc. Rabbah stated: When we were at R'Huna's we raised the following question: 'Is it necessary to mention the New Moon in [the prayers of] the New Year?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. is it necessary to say 'this day of the New Moon' in addition to 'this Day of Memorial'?');"><sup>17</sup></span> Is it necessary to mention it because different additional offerings were ordained for the two celebrations<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'they are divided in their additional offerings'. Besides the sacrifices that were ordered for the New Year festival (cf. Num. XXIX, 2ff) the sacrifices of the New Moon (which, of course, always coincided with the first day of the New Year) had also to be offered on that day (ibid. 6) .');"><sup>18</sup></span>
י אמר רבה כי הוינן בי רב הונא איבעיא לן מהו להזכיר של ראש חדש בראש השנה כיון דחלוקין במוספין אמרינן או דילמא זכרון אחד עולה לכאן ולכאן
10 or is rather one mention of "memorial"<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since both the New Year festival and the New Moon were associated in Scripture with memorial or remembrance before God (cf. Lev. XXIII, 24 and Num. X, 10) .');"><sup>19</sup></span> sufficient for both? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'goes up towards here and towards here',');"><sup>20</sup></span> And he told us, 'You have learnt It: R'DOSA RULED: THE PERSON WHO ACTS AS CONGREGATIONAL READER etc. Does not [this disagreement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Rabbis with R. Dosa spoken of in our MISHNAH:');"><sup>21</sup></span>
יא אמר לן תניתוה רבי דוסא אומר העובר לפני התיבה כו' מאי לאו להזכיר
11 apply] to the mention [of the New Moon]? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. our Mishnah, their opinion being that the New Moon need not be mentioned in the prayer of the New Year's day.');"><sup>22</sup></span> - No; [it may refer] to the conditional form of the prayer.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which R. Dosa had laid down. In their opinion the expression 'WHETHER IT BE TODAY etc.' should be omitted, but the mention of the New Moon must be included.');"><sup>23</sup></span> Logical reasoning also Supports this.
יב לא להתנות
12 For in a Baraitha it was taught: 'And so<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. with a conditional form of prayer.');"><sup>24</sup></span> did R'Dosa proceed on the New Moons<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whenever it was uncertain whether the day following the twenty-ninth or the thirtieth of the preceding month was declared as the New Moon.');"><sup>25</sup></span> throughout the year but they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Rabbis.');"><sup>26</sup></span>
יג הכי נמי מסתברא מדקתני בברייתא וכן היה ר' דוסא עושה בראשי חדשים של כל השנה כולה ולא הודו לו
13 did not agree with him'. Now if you admit [that their objection was] to his conditional form of prayer one can well understand why they did not agree with him;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since they might well object to introduce conditional forms in a prayer.');"><sup>27</sup></span> but if you maintain [that their objection was] to the mention of the New Moon why [it may be asked] did they not agree with him?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The New Moon, surely, should be mentioned in the prayers for the ordinary New Moon's day.');"><sup>28</sup></span>
יד אי אמרת בשלמא להתנות משום הכי לא הודו לו אלא אי אמרת להזכיר אמאי לא הודו לו
14 - What then [would you suggest? That their objection was] to his conditional form of prayer? But what purpose [it could be retorted] was served by expressing disagreement In the two cases?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Those of the New Year and the New Moon. Their disagreement on the conditional form of prayer in the one case should, surely, be sufficient indication of their disagreement in the other.');"><sup>29</sup></span>
טו ואלא מאי להתנות למה לי לאיפלוגי בתרתי צריכא דאי אשמעינן ר"ה הוה אמינא בהא קאמרי רבנן דלא משום דאתי לזלזולי ביה אבל בראשי חדשים של כל השנה כולה אימא מודו ליה לר' דוסא
15 - [Both were] necessary. For if we had been informed [of their disagreement In the case of] the New Year Only it might have been presumed that only in this case did the Rabbis maintain that no [conditional form of prayer should be introduced] because<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Observing that the day is specifically described in the prayers as of doubtful holiness.');"><sup>30</sup></span> people might come to regard the day with disrespect,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And thus desecrate both days of the festival.');"><sup>31</sup></span>
טז ואי אתמר בהא בהא קאמר ר' דוסא אבל בהך אימא מודה להו לרבנן צריכא
16 but that in the case of the New Moons throughout the year<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the question of desecration does not arise since work is permitted on the New Moon.');"><sup>32</sup></span> they, it might have been presumed - agree with R'Dosa. And if [their disagreement with R'Dosa] had been expressed in the latter case Only,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., and the case of the New Year had not been mentioned at all.');"><sup>33</sup></span>
יז מיתיבי ראש השנה שחל להיות בשבת בית שמאי אומרים מתפלל עשר ובית הלל אומרים מתפלל תשע ואם איתא בית שמאי אחת עשרה מבעי ליה
17 it might have been presumed that R'Dosa maintained his view only in that case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the question of desecration does not arise since work is permitted on the New Moon.');"><sup>32</sup></span> but that in the other case he agrees with the Rabbis.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In order, as explained supra, to obviate any possible desecration of the festival.');"><sup>34</sup></span> [Hence it is that both cases were] necessary. An objection was raised: If the New Year festival fell on a Sabbath, Beth Shammai ruled: One shall recite ten benedictions,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first three (cf. P.B. p. 44f) and the last three (ibid. p. 50ff) that are recited three times every day; one for the Sabbath, one dealing with the sanctity of the New Year and the divine sovereignty of the universe, and two dealing respectively with aspects of God's remembrances and the blowing of the shofar (ibid. pp. 247ff) .');"><sup>35</sup></span> and Beth Hillel ruled: One only recites nine.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. Ber. III and Tosef. R.H. II ad fin. The mention of the Sabbath and the sanctity of the New Year are included in one benediction which concludes with 'Who sanctifies the Sabbath and Israel and the Day of Memorial'. (cf. P.B. p. 249) .');"><sup>36</sup></span> Now if that were so<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the New Moon must also be mentioned in the New Year prayers.');"><sup>37</sup></span> should it not have been necessary according to Beth Shammai<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who ordered specific benedictions for every subject.');"><sup>38</sup></span> [to order] eleven benedictions?
Previous ChapterNext Chapter