ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafEruvin 100
ERUVIN 100 - has been sponsored by the Jesselson Foundation
(a) Rav Sheshes forbids sitting on the root of a tree that is lower than
three Tefachim if it is the extension of a root which, nearer to the tree,
has grown to more than three Tefachim - since it comes from what is Asur.
(b) 'Meshunisa' is a root that grows diagonally from the foot of a tree,
and from which other roots jut out. Those that jut out above three
Tefachim are forbidden; those that jut out from below three Tefachim are
permitted, and those that jut out from above three Tefachim, but which
grow downwards to less than three Tefachim are equivalent to the case over
which Rabah and Rav Sheshes argue.
(c) 'Anigra' - is a tree that grows out of a ditch which covers it on
*two* sides, and 'Keren Zavis' is a tree that grows out of the corner of a
wall, which covers it on *three*. Both are subject to the Machlokes
between Rabah and Rav Sheshes: according to Rabah, we reckon the three
Tefachim from the point where it grows above the wall; whereas according
to Rav Sheshes, we reckon them from where the tree emerges from the
(a) Rav Yosef permitted sitting on the date-palm that grew through Abaye's
roof which had not yet grown to a height of three Tefachim from the roof -
because he held like Rabah, who reckons the three Tefachim from where one
sees it, and not from its source.
(b) We might have thought that even Rav Sheshes will agree with that
ruling - because of the Sevara 'Beisa Kema'an de'Malya Damya', which might
have caused us to consider the inside of the house as being below ground
(c) Our Mishnah, which prohibits sitting on roots that are three Tefachim
high speaks ...
1. ... according to Rav Sheshes - with regard to sitting on the lower
section of a root that is more than three Tefachim high closer to the
2. ... according to Rabah - when one side of the root grows beside a
raised level, but whose other three sides are higher than three Tefachim
from the foot of the tree, then we reckon the three Tefachim from the foot
of the tree. Here Rabah agrees, since it is only covered by the level o
ground on *one* side.
(a) Climbing, leaning or swinging on a tree or an animal is forbidden, not
because of the strain - but because one may break off a twig or a branch
(in order to facilitate the climb, or to hit the animal), neither of which
will apply to a wall or a pit. Clambering on them or into them is
(b) In the second answer, both Beraisos speak about someone who climbed
the tree *on* Shabbos; the Beraisa which forbids him to descend speaks
when he climbed it on purpose, the Beraisa which permits him to descend,
speaks when he climbed it by mistake.
(c) According to the third answer - both Beraisos speak when he climbed
the tree be'Shogeg; the one maintains that Chazal *penalized* a Shogeg
because of a Meizid, the other, that they did *not*.
(a) If the blood of ...
1. ... a Bechor which got mixed up with the blood of another Bechor - one
sprinkles from it just once (towards the Yesod of the Mizbei'ach), and
that one sprinkling will cover both Korbanos Bechor.
(b) If the blood of a Chatas got mixed up with the blood of a Bechor,
Rebbi Eliezer holds that it must be sprinkled four times - because if one
were to sprinkle only once, he would be transgressing the La'av of 'Bal
Tigra'. There is no 'Bal Tosif', he says, unless it is on its own (when he
is not definitely fulfilling a Mitzvah, as he is here).
2. ... a Chatas which got mixed up with the blood of another Chatas - one
sprinkles from it one set of four (one on each corner of the Mizbei'ach)
to cover both Chata'os.
(c) Rebbi Yehoshua disagrees; firstly, because of the La'av of Bal Tosif
(according to him, it is Bal Tigra that one transgresses only when it is
on its own); secondly, because it is better to transgress Bal Tigra
through an *inaction* that is forbidden, than Bal Tosif through a
forbidden *action* ('Shev ve'Al Tosif Adif'). Note: Rebbi Yehoshua also
relies on the fact that if a Kohen sprinkles the blood of any Korban whose
blood requires sprinkling, on the outer Mizbei'ach, just once (even if it
really required four sprinklings) he is Yotze Bedieved - Rashi and Tosfos.
(a) The Gemara initially thought that Rebbi Eliezer, who holds that, when
action and non-action clash, it is better to act than to refrain, will
also hold that since the Mitzvah of descending the tree and the
prohibition of using it (in order to descend) clash, it is better that he
performs the positive Mitzvah (de'Rabbanan) of descending; whereas
according to Rebbi Yehoshua, in whose opinion one should rather refrain
from acting, the same will apply here, and the person who climbed the
tree, should remain there.
(b) Rebbi Eliezer may well agree that he should rather remain in the tree,
because descending is not really a Mitzvah (like sprinkling the blood is),
but rather withdrawing from an Isur.
(c) And Rebbi Yehoshua may well agree that here, it is better that he
descends immediately, in order to avoid the sin of using a tree, whereas
by the case of sprinkling the blood, one is not transgressing any La'av by
not sprinkling the blood.
(a) It is forbidden to climb a tree that has dried up - i.e. that has no
moist and is therefore considered detached, and one that will not re-grow
- because one may break off a twig or a branch, should they interfere with
one's climbing progress.
(b) One may climb a dried-up tree in the summer-time - provided no fruit
remains on the tree from last year, and provided there are *no* twigs left
to break off. If there *are*, it is forbidden, because people will not
know that the twigs or the fruit are from last year, and it will be Asur
because of 'Mar'is ha'Ayin'.
(c) Chazal did not decree climbing a dried-up tree because of a fresh one
- due to the fact that there is no Mar'is ha'Ayin, since the difference
between them is easily discernible. They nevertheless forbade it in the
winter - because in the winter, the difference between a moist tree and a
dried-up one is unclear, and Mar'is ha'Ayin therefore applies.
(d) Rav forbade climbing even a bare dried-up tree in Afsatya because they
were not B'nei Torah, and would in all likelihood, come to extend the
concession even to a tree that had branches and fruit.
(a) Walking on *dry* grass is one of the many possible leniencies brought
in our Sugya with regard to the general Isur of walking on grass.
(b) If one pulls out grass one is involved with the Isur of Tolesh, which
is in turn, a Toldah of Kotzer.
(c) Nowadays, the Gemara concludes, walking on grass is permitted in all
cases - since we rule like Rebbi Shimon, who holds 'Davar she'Ein
(a) We also learn from the Pasuk "ve'Atz be'Raglav Chotei" - the
prohibition of forcing one's wife to have relations.
(b) Someone who does this will have unworthy children.
(c) The rewards of having relations *twice* - is sons. Why is that?
Because the first time increases the woman's desire for the second time,
and when the woman 'sows' first, the result is a son.
(a) A woman who approaches her husband for a D'var Mitzvah will have
children who are 'Nevonim' (a level beyond Chachamim).
(b) The prime example of this is Leah, who said to Ya'akov 'Elai Tavo',
and who subsequently bore to Ya'akov, Yisachar, about whom the Pasuk in
Divrei Hayamim writes "u'mi'B'nei Yisachar Yod'ei Binah la'Itim".
(c) When Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi included women approaching their husbands
among the curses of Chavah - he meant that they should not *ask outright*,
but not that they should not *hint* (which is what Leah did, since she
said '*Elai* Tavo' [which has various connotations], and not '*Alai* Tavo'
- which would have been specific).
(a) The curse of ...
1. + 2. ... "Harbah Arbeh" - refers to the blood of Nidah and the blood of virginity;
3. ... "Itzvonech" - to the pain of bringing up children;
4. ... "ve'Heronech" - to the pain of pregnancy;
5. ... "be'Etzev Teldi Banim" - to the pain of childbirth;
6. ... "ve'El Ishech Teshukasech" - to the longing that she experiences when her husband goes away on a journey;
7. ... "ve'Hu Yimshol Bach" - refers to the fact that it is the man who approaches his wife, but never vice-versa.
1. 'Atufah ke'Avel' means - that a married woman is embarrassed to go out
with her hair uncovered;
(c) The third curse listed by the Beraisa is that she becomes her
husband's cushion i.e. he lies on top and she underneath.
2. 'u'Menudah mi'Kol Adam' - that she is forbidden to all men besides her
husband (whereas he may have as many wives as he pleases);
3. 'va'Chavushah be'Veis ha'Asurin' - that a woman really belongs in the
home ("Kol Kevudah Bas Melech Penimah" - Tehilim).
(d) Rav Dimi does not list these, because he considers them praiseworthy,
like the Pasuk in Iyov, which writes that the mule teaches us to bend when
urinating, and the rooster to cover its mate while mating. Note: The
Gemara does not bring any source why growing a lot of hair is praiseworthy
(perhaps it is obvious, because this is a known beauty feature of a woman
- as the Mishnah in Sotah explains).
(a) If the Torah had not taught us all the good Midos, we would have
(b) 'Derech Eretz from a rooster' - refers to when the rooster appeases
the hen before they mate.
- ... modesty from the cat;
- ... honesty (eating only what is one's own, and not anyone else's) from the ant;
- .... loyalty to one's mate from the dove.
(c) He subsequently says to her 'I will buy you a coat that goes down to
your feet'. However, after the mating, he says to her 'When I have
(money), I will buy it for you'. But of course, he never has any money!