## Eruvin Daf 18a

###### Eruvin 18a:1
[Eruvin 18a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:1)

לְהַרְחִיק כׇּל שֶׁהוּא, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיַּרְבֶּה בְּפַסִּין. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: עַד בֵּית סָאתַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**to distance** the boards from the well and expand the enclosed area by **any amount,** i.e., as much as one wishes, **provided that he increases the** number of upright **boards** between the double posts. **Rabbi Yehuda says:** The partitioned area may be expanded **up to** an area of **two *beit se’a*,** which is an area of five thousand square cubits.


###### Eruvin 18a:2
[Eruvin 18a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:2)

אָמְרוּ לוֹ: לֹא אָמְרוּ בֵּית סָאתַיִם אֶלָּא לְגִנָּה וּלְקַרְפֵּף, אֲבָל אִם הָיָה דִּיר אוֹ סַהַר אוֹ מוּקְצֶה אוֹ חָצֵר — אֲפִילּוּ בֵּית חֲמֵשֶׁת כּוֹרִין, אֲפִילּוּ בֵּית עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹרִין מוּתָּר. וּמוּתָּר לְהַרְחִיק כׇּל שֶׁהוּא, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיַּרְבֶּה בְּפַסִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Rabbis **said to him: They only spoke of** an area of **two *beit se’a* with regard to a garden or an enclosure** used for storing wood, scrap, and the like **[*karpef*]. But if it was a pen [*dir*], or a stable [*sahar*], or a backyard, or a courtyard** in front of the house, **even** if it had an area of **five *beit kor*** or **even ten *beit kor*, it is permitted. And it is permitted to distance** the boards and expand the enclosed area **by any amount, provided that one increases the** upright **boards** between the double posts.


###### Eruvin 18a:3
[Eruvin 18a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:3)

**גְּמָ׳** לֵימָא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כַּחֲנַנְיָא, דְּתַנְיָא: עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין לְבוֹר וַחֲבָלִין לִשְׁיָירָא. וַחֲנַנְיָא אוֹמֵר: חֲבָלִין לְבוֹר, אֲבָל לֹא פַּסִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that **the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Ḥananya, as it was taught** in a *baraita*: **One may arrange** upright **boards around a** water **cistern and ropes around a caravan. Ḥananya** disagrees and **says:** One may set up **ropes for a cistern, but not** upright **boards.**


###### Eruvin 18a:4
[Eruvin 18a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:4)

אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא חֲנַנְיָא בּוֹר לְחוּד בְּאֵר לְחוּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this suggestion: **Even if you say** that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of **Ḥananya, a cistern** of collected rain water has a **discrete** law, as the water will eventually be consumed and the upright boards will become unnecessary; and **a well** of spring **water** has a **discrete** law, as the water is constantly renewed and the upright boards will remain useful.


###### Eruvin 18a:5
[Eruvin 18a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:5)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: מִדְּלָא קָתָנֵי ״חֲנַנְיָא אוֹמֵר: עוֹשִׂין חֲבָלִין לְבוֹר וּפַסִּין לִבְאֵר״, מִכְּלָל דְּלַחֲנַנְיָא לָא שְׁנָא בּוֹר וְלָא שְׁנָא בְּאֵר — חֲבָלִין אִין, פַּסִּין לָא. לֵימָא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כַּחֲנַנְיָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Some say** a different version of the previous passage: **From** the fact **that** the *baraita* **does not teach: Ḥananya says: One may set up ropes around** a water **cistern and boards around a well, by inference, according to** the opinion of **Ḥananya, there is no difference between a cistern and a well.** In both cases, **ropes** are **indeed** permitted, whereas upright **boards are not. Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Ḥananya.**


###### Eruvin 18a:6
[Eruvin 18a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:6)

אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא חֲנַנְיָא, לְמַאי דְּקָאָמַר תַּנָּא קַמָּא — קָא מַהְדַּר לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **Even if you say** that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of **Ḥananya,** he was only replying **to that which the first *tanna* had said;** since the first *tanna* had spoken only of a cistern, there was no need for Ḥananya to fully clarify his own position and distinguish between a cistern and a well.


###### Eruvin 18a:7
[Eruvin 18a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:7)

לֵימָא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא? דִּתְנַן: אֶחָד בְּאֵר הָרַבִּים וּבוֹר הָרַבִּים וּבְאֵר הַיָּחִיד עוֹשִׂין לָהֶן פַּסִּין. אֲבָל בּוֹר הַיָּחִיד — עוֹשִׂין לוֹ מְחִיצָה גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva. As we learned** in a mishna: In **each of** the cases of **a public well, a public cistern, and a private well, one may arrange** upright **boards for them, but** in the case of **a private cistern, one must establish** a proper **partition for it ten handbreadths high;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Akiva.**


###### Eruvin 18a:8
[Eruvin 18a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:8)

וְאִילּוּ הָכָא קָתָנֵי: לְבֵירָאוֹת. לְבֵירָאוֹת — אִין, לְבוֹרוֹת לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Whereas here** in the mishna **it teaches:** One may arrange upright boards **for a well,** from which one may infer that **for a well, yes,** it is permitted to use posts, but **for a cistern, no,** it is not permitted. This is opposed to Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, which maintains that posts may be arranged for a public cistern.


###### Eruvin 18a:9
[Eruvin 18a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:9)

אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, בְּאֵר מַיִם חַיִּים דִּפְסִיקָא לֵיהּ, לָא שְׁנָא דְּרַבִּים וְלָא שְׁנָא דְּיָחִיד — קָתָנֵי. בּוֹר מְכוּנָּסִין דְּלָא פְּסִיקָא לֵיהּ — לָא קָתָנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument as well: **Even if you say** that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva,** the *tanna* of the mishna **teaches** the case of **a well of spring water, which he** can teach in **a distinct** manner because **there is no difference** whether it belongs to **the public and there is no difference** whether it belongs **to an individual,** as it is always permitted. However, **he did not teach** the case of **a cistern** containing **collected** rain water, **which he** could **not** teach in a **distinct** manner because there is a difference between a public cistern and a private one. However, it cannot be proven from here that he disagrees with Rabbi Akiva.


###### Eruvin 18a:10
[Eruvin 18a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:10)

לֵימָא מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא, דִּתְנַן: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵין עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין אֶלָּא לִבְאֵר הָרַבִּים בִּלְבַד, וְאִילּוּ הָכָא קָתָנֵי לְבֵירָאוֹת — לָא שְׁנָא דְּרַבִּים וְלָא שְׁנָא דְּיָחִיד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, as we learned** in a mishna: **Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava says: One may only arrange** upright **boards for a public well, whereas here** the mishna **states: For wells.** The plural term implies that **there is no difference** if the well belongs to **the public, and there is no difference** if the well belongs **to an individual.**


###### Eruvin 18a:11
[Eruvin 18a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:11)

אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא, מַאי בֵּירָאוֹת — בֵּירָאוֹת דְּעָלְמָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara also rejects this line of reasoning: **Even if you say** that the mishna is in accordance with **Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava,** to **what** is the mishna referring when it says **wells?** It is referring to **wells in general,** but the *tanna* means to include only public wells.


###### Eruvin 18a:12
[Eruvin 18a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:12)

מַאי דְּיוֹמְדִין? אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר: דְּיוֹ עַמּוּדִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna had mentioned double posts [*deyomadin*]: The Gemara asks: **What are *deyomadin*? Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: Two [*deyo*] posts [*amudin*],** which are put together to create a single corner piece.


###### Eruvin 18a:13
[Eruvin 18a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:13)

דְּיוֹ לִמְנוּדֶּה שֶׁבַח זוֹנִית נִתְקַלְקֵל בְּמִידָּה שְׁלֹשָׁה סִימָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Having cited Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar’s statement with reference to the prefix *deyo*, the Gemara cites other statements of his. **Two, to** one who was **ostracized, praise, nourishment, ruin, attribute, three,** are **mnemonics** for the following statements by Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar.


###### Eruvin 18a:14
[Eruvin 18a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:14)

תְּנַן הָתָם, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כֹּל הַשִּׁיתִין פְּטוּרִין, חוּץ מִן הַדְּיוֹפְרָא. מַאי דְּיוֹפְרָא? אָמַר עוּלָּא: אִילָן הָעוֹשֶׂה דְּיוֹ פֵּירוֹת בַּשָּׁנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**We learned there** in a mishna: **Rabbi Yehuda says: All inferior figs are exempt** from being tithed, even if they are of doubtfully tithed produce [*demai*], as even if the seller is an *am ha’aretz*, he must certainly have already separated tithes from them, since the loss incurred by tithing is negligible, **except for *deyufra*.** The Gemara asks: **What is *deyufra*? Ulla said: A tree that yields two [*deyo*]** harvests **of fruit [*peirot*] each year.**


###### Eruvin 18a:15
[Eruvin 18a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:15)

אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר: דְּיוֹ פַּרְצוּף פָּנִים הָיָה לוֹ לְאָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם צַרְתָּנִי״. כְּתִיב: ״וַיִּבֶן ה׳ אֱלֹהִים אֶת הַצֵּלָע וְגוֹ׳״, רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל: חַד אָמַר פַּרְצוּף, וְחַד אָמַר זָנָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar** also **said: Adam** was first created with **two [*deyo*] faces,** one male and the other female. **As it is stated: “You have formed me behind and before,** and laid Your hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5). Similarly, **it is written: “And the *tzela*, which** the Lord, God, had taken from the man, **He made** a woman, and brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22). **Rav and Shmuel** disagree over the meaning of the word *tzela*: **One said:** It means a female **face,** from which God created Eve; **and one said:** Adam was created with **a tail [*zanav*],** which God removed from him and from which He created Eve.


###### Eruvin 18a:16
[Eruvin 18a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:16)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר פַּרְצוּף — הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב ״אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם צַרְתָּנִי״. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר זָנָב — מַאי ״אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם צַרְתָּנִי״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to the one who says** that *tzela* means **face;** it is understandable **that it is written: “You have formed me [*tzartani*] behind and before.” However, according to the one who says** that *tzela* means **tail, what is** meant by the verse: **“You have formed me [*tzartani*] behind and before”?**


###### Eruvin 18a:17
[Eruvin 18a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:17)

כִּדְרַבִּי אַמֵּי, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: אָחוֹר לְמַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית, וָקֶדֶם לְפוּרְעָנוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that this verse is to be understood as bearing a moral message, **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Ami, as Rabbi Ami said: Behind** means Adam was created at the end of **the act of creation; and before** means that he was first **for punishment.**


###### Eruvin 18a:18
[Eruvin 18a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:18)

בִּשְׁלָמָא אָחוֹר לְמַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית — דְּלָא אִיבְּרִי עַד מַעֲלֵי שַׁבְּתָא, אֶלָּא וָקֶדֶם לְפוּרְעָנוּת מַאי הִיא? אִילֵּימָא מִשּׁוּם קְלָלָה — הָא בַּתְּחִילָּה נִתְקַלֵּל נָחָשׁ, וּלְבַסּוֹף נִתְקַלְּלָה חַוָּה, וּלְבַסּוֹף נִתְקַלֵּל אָדָם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted,** it is understandable that Adam was **behind,** or last, **in the act of creation,** meaning that **he was not created until** the sixth day, **Shabbat eve. However, before,** or first, **for punishment, what** does **this** mean? **If you say** that he was punished first **because of the curse** pronounced in the wake of the sin involving the Tree of Knowledge, there is a difficulty. **Wasn’t the snake was cursed first, and afterward Eve was cursed, and** only **at the end was Adam cursed?**


###### Eruvin 18a:19
[Eruvin 18a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:19)

אֶלָּא לַמַּבּוּל, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּמַח אֶת כׇּל הַיְקוּם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה מֵאָדָם וְעַד בְּהֵמָה וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** this refers **to** the punishment of the **Flood, as it is written: “And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle,** creeping things and fowl of the heaven” (Genesis 7:23). This indicates that the punishment began with man.


###### Eruvin 18a:20
[Eruvin 18a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:20)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר פַּרְצוּף, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב ״וַיִּיצֶר״ תְּרֵין יוֹדִין. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר זָנָב — מַאי ״וַיִּיצֶר״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to the one who said** that Eve was originally **a face** or side of Adam; it is understandable **that it is written:** “Then the Lord God **formed [*vayyitzer*]** man” (Genesis 2:7). *Vayyitzer* is written with **a double *yod*,** one for Adam and one for Eve. **However, according to the one who said** that Eve was created from **a tail, what is** conveyed by spelling ***vayyitzer*** with a double *yod*?


###### Eruvin 18a:21
[Eruvin 18a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:21)

כִּדְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן פַּזִּי, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן פַּזִּי: אוֹי לִי מִיִּצְרִי, אוֹי לִי מִיּוֹצְרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: This is interpreted homiletically, **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, as Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said:** This comes to emphasize that which one says to himself in every circumstance: **Woe unto me from my** evil **inclination [*yetzer*]** if I perform the will of my Maker, **and woe to me from my Maker [*Yotzri*]** if I perform the will of my inclination.


###### Eruvin 18a:22
[Eruvin 18a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:22)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר פַּרְצוּף, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב ״זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בְּרָאָם״. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר זָנָב — מַאי ״זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בְּרָאָם״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to the one who said** that Eve was **a face,** it is understandable **that it is written: “Male and female, He created them,** and blessed them, and called their name Man in the day when they were created” (Genesis 5:2), which indicates that from the very beginning of their creation, He fashioned two faces, one for the male and the other for the female. **However, according to the one who said** that Eve was created from **a tail, what is** the meaning of the verse: **“Male and female, He created them”?**


###### Eruvin 18a:23
[Eruvin 18a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:23)

לְכִדְרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ. דְּרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ רָמֵי, כְּתִיב: ״זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בְּרָאָם״, וּכְתִיב: ״(כִּי) בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אוֹתוֹ״. בַּתְּחִלָּה עָלְתָה בְּמַחְשָׁבָה לִבְראוֹת שְׁנַיִם, וּלְבַסּוֹף לֹא נִבְרָא אֶלָּא אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It can be explained **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Abbahu, as Rabbi Abbahu raised a contradiction** between the verses: On the one hand **it is written: “Male and female, He created them,”** in the plural, **and** on the other hand **it is written:** “So God created man in His own image, **for in the image of God He created him”** (Genesis 1:27), in the singular. **At first, the thought entered** God’s mind **to create two, and ultimately, only one was** actually **created.**


###### Eruvin 18a:24
[Eruvin 18a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:24)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר פַּרְצוּף, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּסְגּוֹר בָּשָׂר תַּחְתֶּנָּה״, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר זָנָב — מַאי ״וַיִּסְגּוֹר בָּשָׂר תַּחְתֶּנָּה״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to the one who said** that Eve was **a face,** it is understandable **that it is written:** “And He took one of his sides **and closed up the flesh in its place”** (Genesis 2:21). **However, according to the one who said** that Eve was created from **a tail, what is** meant by the verse: **“And He closed up the flesh in its place”?**


###### Eruvin 18a:25
[Eruvin 18a:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:25)

אָמַר רַב זְבִיד, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לִמְקוֹם חֲתָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Zevid said, and some say** it was **Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say** it was **Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: It was necessary** to say that the fleshed closed up **only with regard to the place of the incision.**


###### Eruvin 18a:26
[Eruvin 18a:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:26)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר זָנָב, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּבֶן״, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר פַּרְצוּף — מַאי ״וַיִּבֶן״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges the other opinion: **Granted, according to the one who said** that Eve was created from **a tail;** it is understandable **that it is written: “And** the Lord God **built** the *tzela*” (Genesis 2:22), as it was a completely new building. **However, according to the one who said** that Eve was a complete **face** or side, **what is** the meaning of: **“And He built”?** What needed to be built?


###### Eruvin 18a:27
[Eruvin 18a:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:27)

לְכִדְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא. דְּדָרֵישׁ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא: ״וַיִּבֶן ה׳ אֱלֹהִים אֶת הַצֵּלָע״ — מְלַמֵּד שֶׁקִּילְּעָהּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְחַוָּה וֶהֱבִיאָהּ לְאָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁכֵּן בִּכְרַכֵּי הַיָּם קוֹרִין לְקַלָּעִיתָא בַּנָּיְיתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: This must be interpreted homiletically, **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya, as Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya interpreted homiletically** the verse: **“And the Lord God built the *tzela*.”** This verse **teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, braided for Eve** her hair, **and** then **brought her to Adam, as in the coastal towns, they call braiding** hair **building.**


###### Eruvin 18a:28
[Eruvin 18a:28](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/18a:28)

דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״וַיִּבֶן ה׳ אֱלֹהִים״, אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבְּנָאָהּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְחַוָּה כְּבִנְיָין

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Alternatively,** the verse: **“And the Lord God built,”** can be understood as a description of Eve’s basic shape, as **Rav Ḥisda said, and some say it is taught in a *baraita*:** This verse **teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, built Eve like the structure**