REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafEruvin 24
ERUVIN 24 - Dedicated by Shari and Jay Gold and family in memory of Rav Dov
ben Dovid Meir (Bennett Gold), whose Yahrzeit is 3 Sivan
(a) We have learnt that if one planted *trees* in the majority of the
enclosure (of more than a Beis Sasayim), it has the Din of a Chatzer and is
permitted. According to Rav Yehudah quoting Avimi, this speaks when they are
What does that mean?
(b) What does Rav Nachman hold in this regard?
(c) What must one do if any case that the enclosure preceded the dwelling?
(a) What is Chizkiyah's Sha'aleh on the Mishnah in Kelim 'Kol K'lei Ba'alei-
Batim Shi'uran ke'Rimonim'?
What does the Gemara resolve with regard to ten independent breaches that
occured at intervals, when each breach was repaired before the next one
(b) 'Sandal she'Nifsekah Achas me'Oznav, ve'Tiknah, Tamei Medras'. It is
not at first clear, why the shoe becomes Tahor when the second strap tears,
since the first strap has already been repaired by then.
How did Chizkiyah
(c) How did Rebbi Yochanan resolve Chizkiyah's initial Sha'aleh from
Chizkiyah's own explanation of the Mishnah in Kelim?
(d) Did Chizkiyah
accept Rebbi Yochanan's explanation? What did he have to say about Rebbi
Yochanan (two versions)?
(a) What is the Din of a Rachbah behind a house which is more than a Beis
Sasayim, and why is that?
Answers to questions
(b) If the Rachbah has a door leading from the house, one may carry there.
Under what condition is that?
(c) What is the Chidush?
(a) If an enclosure that was more than a Beis Sasayim and that was built
adjoining the dwelling, became filled with water, does that have the Din of
an enclosure that has been *sown*, or of one in which *trees were planted*?
(b) Initially, the Gemara lays down two conditions under which one may carry
What are they?
(c) Which of these conditions is not accepted, and why is that?
(a) What was the case of that Rachbah in Pum Nahara? Why was it considered a
(b) What problem did it present with regard to the path at one end, and to
the Mavoy on the other (as well as to itself)?
(c) Why is this case worse than the Mavoy which opened into the Rachbah on
Daf 7b, which did not require any Tikun?
(d) What would have been the simplist thing to do under the circumstances,
and why did they not do it?
(a) Why could they not rectify the Rachbah by simply erecting a wall above
the river-bank, to serve as a Mechitzah for the Rachbah at the other end of
(b) How would putting up a Tzuras ha'Pesach at the entrance of the Rachbah -
where the path led into it, be effective?
(c) Then why did they not do that?
(a) Abaye suggested putting up a Lechi at the entrance of the path (where it
led into the Rachbah) - which could be knocked into the ground, so as not to
suffer the same fate as a Tzuras ha'Pesach would, and which would be
effective due to a 'Migu'(similar to the one which we mentioned in 7b). Why
would a Lechi not work without the 'Migu'?
(b) On what grounds does Rava object to Abaye's suggestion?
(a) Rava therefore concluded that they should place a Lechi at the end of
the Mavoy, where it led into the Rachbah.
Was that the only Tikun that was
(b) On what basis did the Lechi help rectify the Rachbah?
(c) What did the Lechi permit unanymously?
(d) What did the Lechi definitely not permit?
Rav Acha and Ravina argued about whether the Lechi permitted carrying from
the Mavoy to the Rechavah or vice-versa. What is the reason of the one who
Answers to questions
- ... that it did?
- ... that it did not?