## Eruvin Daf 31a

###### Eruvin 31a:1
[Eruvin 31a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:1)

מְעָרְבִין לְכֹהֵן טָהוֹר בִּתְרוּמָה טְהוֹרָה בְּקֶבֶר, הֵיכִי אָזֵיל? בְּשִׁידָּה תֵּיבָה וּמִגְדָּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**One may establish an *eiruv* for a priest who is** ritually **pure with *teruma* that is** ritually **pure** and resting **on a grave,** even though the location is impure and he cannot reach it. **How does he go** there? **In a carriage, crate, or cupboard,** which shield him from the ritual impurity.


###### Eruvin 31a:2
[Eruvin 31a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:2)

וְהָא כֵּיוָן דְּאַחֲתָא אִיטַּמְּיָא לַהּ! בְּשֶׁלֹּא הוּכְשְׁרָה, אוֹ שֶׁנִּילּוֹשָׁה בְּמֵי פֵּירוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Isn’t** it true that **once** the *eiruv* **was placed** directly on the grave, the *teruma* **became defiled,** and ritually impure *teruma* is not fit to be eaten by anyone? The Gemara answers: We are dealing here with a case **where** the *teruma* **had not yet been rendered susceptible** to ritual impurity, as it had not yet come into contact with a liquid. Produce that has yet to come into contact with a liquid does not contract impurity. **Or** we are dealing with bread **that was kneaded with fruit juice,** which is not one of the seven liquids that render a food susceptible to ritual impurity.


###### Eruvin 31a:3
[Eruvin 31a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:3)

וְהֵיכִי מַיְיתֵי לַהּ? בִּפְשׁוּטֵי כְלֵי עֵץ דְּלָא מְקַבְּלִי טוּמְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now asks: **How can he bring it** from where it is resting on the grave in order to eat it? The Gemara answers: **With flat wooden utensils** that are not shaped as receptacles and therefore **do not contract** ritual **impurity.**


###### Eruvin 31a:4
[Eruvin 31a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:4)

וְהָא קָא מַאֲהִיל?! דְּמַיְיתֵי לַהּ אֲחוֹרֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Doesn’t** the utensil **cover** the grave? The Sages decreed that anyone who holds a utensil that is a handbreadth wide over a corpse or grave is ritually impure. The Gemara answers: **He may bring it on the edge** of the utensil while holding the utensil sideways so that it does not form a cover that is a handbreadth wide over the grave.


###### Eruvin 31a:5
[Eruvin 31a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:5)

אִי הָכִי, מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבָּנַן? קָסָבְרִי: אָסוּר לִקְנוֹת בַּיִת בְּאִיסּוּרֵי הֲנָאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If** that is **so,** and there is a way for the *teruma* to remain ritually pure and for the priest to access it, **what is the reason** the Sages disagreed with Rabbi Yehuda and did not allow an *eiruv* to be established for a priest on a grave? The Gemara answers: **They hold** that **it is prohibited to acquire a home with items from which benefit is prohibited.** It is prohibited to derive benefit from a grave. Since one acquires a place of residence for Shabbat by means of the *eiruv*, it would be as if the priest acquired a home for himself with something from which he may not derive benefit.


###### Eruvin 31a:6
[Eruvin 31a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:6)

מִכְּלָל דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר מוּתָּר? קָסָבַר: מִצְוֹת לָאו לֵיהָנוֹת נִיתְּנוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If so, does this prove **by inference that Rabbi Yehuda holds** that **it is permitted** to acquire a home with items from which benefit is prohibited? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda **holds** that **mitzvot were not given for benefit.** The fulfillment of a mitzva is not in itself considered a benefit. Since the acquisition of a place of residence by means of an *eiruv* is a mitzva, as one may establish an *eiruv teḥumin* only for the sake of a mitzva, it is even permitted to establish one’s *eiruv* in a place from which it is prohibited to benefit.


###### Eruvin 31a:7
[Eruvin 31a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:7)

אֶלָּא הָא דְּאָמַר רָבָא: מִצְוֹת לָאו לֵיהָנוֹת נִיתְּנוּ, לֵימָא כְּתַנָּאֵי אַמְרַהּ לִשְׁמַעְתֵּיהּ?! אָמַר לָךְ רָבָא: אִי סְבִירָא לְהוּ דְּאֵין מְעָרְבִין אֶלָּא לִדְבַר מִצְוָה — דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִצְוֹת לָאו לֵיהָנוֹת נִיתְּנוּ. וְהָכָא בְּהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי: מָר סָבַר אֵין מְעָרְבִין אֶלָּא לִדְבַר מִצְוָה, וּמָר סָבַר מְעָרְבִין אֲפִילּוּ לִדְבַר הָרְשׁוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **But** if so, with regard to **that which Rava said: Mitzvot were not given for benefit, let us say** that **he stated his *halakha*** only **in accordance with** the opinion of one side in a dispute between ***tanna’im*.** The Gemara answers that **Rava** could have **said to you: If they hold that one may establish an *eiruv* only for the sake of a mitzva, all would agree** that the *eiruv* may be placed on a grave because **mitzvot were not given for benefit.** However, the dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and the Sages centers on a different aspect of the issue. **Here, they disagree with regard to this: One Sage,** Rabbi Yehuda, **holds: One may establish an *eiruv* only for the sake of a mitzva.** Since mitzvot do not constitute forbidden benefit, it is therefore permitted to make use of the grave. **And one Sage,** i.e., the Rabbis, **holds: One may establish an *eiruv* even for a voluntary matter.** Establishing a Shabbat residence on the site of a grave by means of an *eiruv* made for a voluntary matter is regarded as forbidden benefit, and therefore it is prohibited.


###### Eruvin 31a:8
[Eruvin 31a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:8)

אֶלָּא הָא דְּאָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: אֵין מְעָרְבִין אֶלָּא לִדְבַר מִצְוָה, לֵימָא כְּתַנָּאֵי אַמְרַהּ לִשְׁמַעְתֵּיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **But** if so, with regard to **that which Rav Yosef said** as a general principle: **One may establish an *eiruv* only for the sake of a mitzva, let us say** that **he stated his *halakha* in accordance with** one side in a dispute between the ***tanna’im*.**


###### Eruvin 31a:9
[Eruvin 31a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:9)

אָמַר לְךָ רַב יוֹסֵף: דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אֵין מְעָרְבִין אֶלָּא לִדְבַר מִצְוָה, וּדְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִצְוֹת לָאו לֵיהָנוֹת נִיתְּנוּ, וּבְהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי: מָר סָבַר כֵּיוָן דִּקְנָה לֵיהּ עֵירוּב — לָא נִיחָא לֵיהּ דְּמִינַּטְרָא. וּמָר סָבַר — נִיחָא לֵיהּ דְּמִינַּטְרָא, דְּאִי אִיצְטְרִיךְ אָכֵיל לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rav Yosef** could have **said to you:** In fact, **all agree** that **one may establish an *eiruv* only for the sake of a mitzva, and all agree** that **mitzvot were not given for benefit, and they disagree with regard to this: One Sage,** Rabbi Yehuda, **holds: Once** he **acquired his** Shabbat residence at twilight by means of the ***eiruv*, he is indifferent to its safeguarding,** as his main goal has already been achieved. He has no further need for the food used for the *eiruv*, and therefore, he receives no benefit from its placement on the grave. **And one Sage,** i.e., the Rabbis, **holds: It is pleasing to him that** the *eiruv* **is safeguarded, for if he needs** it the next day, **he can eat it.** According to this opinion, he would be making prohibited use of the grave to preserve his meal for the following day, and therefore the Sages prohibited placing an *eiruv* on a grave.


###### Eruvin 31a:10
[Eruvin 31a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:10)

**מַתְנִי׳** מְעָרְבִין בִּדְמַאי, וּבְמַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁנִּטְּלָה תְּרוּמָתוֹ, וּבְמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וְהֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁנִּפְדּוּ, וְהַכֹּהֲנִים בְּחַלָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **One may establish an *eiruv* with *demai*,** produce purchased from one who may not have separated the required tithes, **and** similarly, one may establish an *eiruv* **with** the **first tithe whose *teruma* has been taken** in order to be given to a priest, **and with** the **second tithe and consecrated articles that have been redeemed; and priests** may establish an *eiruv* **with *ḥalla*,** the portion of dough that must be given to a priest.


###### Eruvin 31a:11
[Eruvin 31a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:11)

אֲבָל לֹא בְּטֶבֶל, וְלֹא בְּמַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁלֹּא נִטְּלָה תְּרוּמָתוֹ, וְלֹא בְּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וְהֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁלֹּא נִפְדּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However,** one may **not** establish an *eiruv* **with *tevel*,** produce from which the priestly dues [*teruma*] and other tithes have not been separated, **nor with first tithe whose *teruma*,** which must be given to a priest, **has not been taken, nor with** the **second tithe or consecrated articles that have not been redeemed.**


###### Eruvin 31a:12
[Eruvin 31a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/31a:12)

**גְּמָ׳** דְּמַאי, הָא לָא חֲזֵי לֵיהּ? מִיגּוֹ דְּאִי בָּעֵי מַפְקַר לְהוּ לְנִכְסֵיהּ וְהָוֵי עָנִי וַחֲזוּ לֵיהּ — הַשְׁתָּא נָמֵי חֲזֵי לֵיהּ. דִּתְנַן: מַאֲכִילִין אֶת הָעֲנִיִּים דְּמַאי

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: How can one establish an *eiruv* with ***demai*? Isn’t it unfit for him?** Since it is prohibited to eat *demai*, how can it be used as an *eiruv*? The Gemara answers: **Since if he wants, he could declare his property ownerless, and he would be a poor** person, **and** the *demai* would then **be fit for him,** as a poor person is permitted to eat *demai*, **now too,** even though he has not renounced ownership of his property, **it is** considered **fit for him** to use as an *eiruv*. **As we learned** in a mishna: **One may feed the poor *demai*,**