## Eruvin Daf 40a

###### Eruvin 40a:1
[Eruvin 40a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:1)

אֶלָּא מִחוּץ לַתְּחוּם אֲתָא. מַאן דַּאֲכַל סָבַר: הַבָּא בִּשְׁבִיל יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה — מוּתָּר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אַחֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**rather,** it had already been caught beforehand, but it **came** to the Exilarch’s house on the Festival **from outside the** Shabbat **limit** and was slaughtered on that day. **The one** who **ate** from it, namely, Rav Naḥman and Rav Ḥisda, **holds:** Something **that comes** from outside the Shabbat limit **for one Jew is permitted to another Jew.** Since the deer was brought for the Exilarch, the Sages at his table were permitted to eat from it, and we do not prohibit them to derive benefit from something that a gentile did for another Jew.


###### Eruvin 40a:2
[Eruvin 40a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:2)

וּמַאן דְּלָא אֲכַל סָבַר: כׇּל דְּאָתֵי לְבֵי רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא — אַדַּעְתָּא דְּכוּלְּהוּ רַבָּנַן אָתֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the one** who **did not eat** from it, Rav Sheshet, **holds: Anything that comes to the house of the Exilarch comes with all the Sages in mind,** as it is known that the Exilarch invites them to dine with him on Festivals. Therefore, just as it was prohibited to the Exilarch himself, as it was brought from outside the Shabbat limit, so too, it was prohibited to all his guests.


###### Eruvin 40a:3
[Eruvin 40a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:3)

וְהָא אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ רַב שֵׁשֶׁת לְרַבָּה בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ?! לֹא הָיוּ דְבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Didn’t Rav Sheshet meet Rabba bar Shmuel and say to him** what he said, indicating that the issue is related to the question of whether the two days are considered distinct sanctities? The Gemara answers: According to Ameimar’s version of the story, **that** encounter **never happened.**


###### Eruvin 40a:4
[Eruvin 40a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:4)

הָהוּא לִיפְתָּא דְּאָתֵי לְמָחוֹזָא, נְפַק רָבָא, חַזְיָא דִּכְמִישָׁא, שְׁרָא רָבָא לְמִיזְבַּן מִינֵּיהּ. אָמַר: הָא וַדַּאי מֵאֶיתְמוֹל נֶעֶקְרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that a delivery of **turnip** was once **brought to** the town of **Meḥoza** by gentile merchants from outside the Shabbat limit on a Festival in the Diaspora. **Rava went out** to the market and **saw** that the turnips **were withered, and** therefore **he permitted** people **to buy them** immediately without having to wait the amount of time needed to bring similar items from outside the limit after the Festival. **He said: These** turnips **were** certainly **uprooted** from the ground **yesterday,** and no prohibited labor was performed with them today.


###### Eruvin 40a:5
[Eruvin 40a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:5)

מַאי אָמְרַתְּ, מִחוּץ לַתְּחוּם אָתְיָא? הַבָּא בִּשְׁבִיל יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה, מוּתָּר לֶאֱכוֹל לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אַחֵר, וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן הַאי דְּאַדַּעְתָּא דְגוֹיִם אֲתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What** might **you say;** that **they came from outside the** Shabbat **limit** and should therefore be prohibited? The accepted principle is: Something **that comes for one Jew is permitted to be eaten by another Jew, and all the more so** with regard to **this** delivery of turnip, **which came with gentiles in mind,** i.e., for their sake rather than for the sake of Jews. Therefore, if they are purchased by Jews, no prohibition is violated.


###### Eruvin 40a:6
[Eruvin 40a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:6)

כֵּיוָן דַּחֲזָא דְּקָא מַפְּשִׁי וּמַיְיתִי לְהוּ — אֲסַר לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara adds: **Once** Rava **saw that** the gentile merchants started to **bring increased** quantities of turnips on Festival days for the sake of their Jewish customers, **he prohibited** the inhabitants of Meḥoza to buy them, for it was evident that they were now being brought for Jews.


###### Eruvin 40a:7
[Eruvin 40a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:7)

הָנְהוּ בְּנֵי גְנָנָא דְּגַזּוּ לְהוּ אָסָא בְּיוֹם טוֹב שֵׁנִי, לְאוּרְתָּא שְׁרָא לְהוּ רָבִינָא לְאוֹרוֹחֵי בֵּיהּ לְאַלְתַּר. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא בַּר תַּחְלִיפָא לְרָבִינָא: לֵיסַר לְהוּ מָר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינָן בְּנֵי תוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **certain canopy makers,** who would braid myrtle branches into their canopies, once **cut myrtles on the second day of a Festival,** and **in the evening Ravina permitted** people **to smell them immediately** at the conclusion of the Festival. **Rava bar Taḥalifa said to Ravina: The Master should prohibit them** to do this, **as they are not knowledgeable in Torah,** and therefore we should be stringent with them lest they come to treat the sanctity of the second Festival day lightly.


###### Eruvin 40a:8
[Eruvin 40a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:8)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב שְׁמַעְיָה: טַעְמָא דְּאֵינָן בְּנֵי תוֹרָה, הָא בְּנֵי תוֹרָה שְׁרֵי?! וְהָא בָּעִינַן בִּכְדֵי שֶׁיֵּעָשׂוּ! אֲזַלוּ שַׁיְילוּהּ לְרָבָא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: בָּעִינַן בִּכְדֵי שֶׁיֵּעָשׂוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Shemaya strongly objects to this: The reason** given here is **that they are not knowledgeable in Torah;** but if **they were knowledgeable in Torah, would it be permitted? Don’t we require** them to wait **the time needed for** the myrtle’s **preparation,** i.e., the time it takes to cut them? **They went and asked Rava. He said to them: We require** them to wait **the time needed for** the myrtle’s **preparation.**


###### Eruvin 40a:9
[Eruvin 40a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:9)

רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר הָעוֹבֵר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּיבָה כּוּ׳.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna cited Rabbi Dosa’s version of the Rosh HaShana prayer: **Rabbi Dosa says: He who passes before the ark** and leads the congregation in prayer on the first day of the festival of Rosh HaShana says: Strengthen us, O Lord our God, on this day of the New Moon, whether it is today or tomorrow.


###### Eruvin 40a:10
[Eruvin 40a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:10)

אָמַר רַבָּה: כִּי הֲוֵינַן בֵּי רַב הוּנָא, אִיבַּעְיָא לַן: מַהוּ לְהַזְכִּיר שֶׁל רֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ בְּרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה? כֵּיוָן דַּחֲלוּקִין בְּמוּסָפִין, אָמְרִינַן? אוֹ דִילְמָא — זִכָּרוֹן אֶחָד עוֹלֶה לְכָאן וּלְכָאן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said: When we were in the house** of study **of Rav Huna, we raised the** following **dilemma: What is** the *halakha* with regard to whether it is proper **to mention the New Moon** during prayer **on Rosh HaShana?** The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma: Do we say that **since they have separate additional offerings,** as one additional offering is brought for the New Moon and another for Rosh HaShana, **we mention** them separately in prayer as well? **Or perhaps one remembrance counts for** both **this and that?** The Torah is referring to both Rosh HaShana and the New Moon as times of remembrance, and therefore perhaps simply mentioning that it is a Day of Remembrance should suffice.


###### Eruvin 40a:11
[Eruvin 40a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:11)

אֲמַר לַן: תְּנֵיתוּהָ, רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: הָעוֹבֵר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּיבָה כּוּ׳ — מַאי לָאו לְהַזְכִּיר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Huna **said to us: You have** already **learned** the answer to this question in the mishna, which states that **Rabbi Dosa says: He who passes before the ark** and leads the congregation in prayer on the first day and on the second day of Rosh HaShana mentions the New Moon in a conditional manner: On this day of the New Moon, whether it is today or tomorrow. But the Rabbis did not agree with him. **What, is it not** that the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Dosa about the need **to mention** the New Moon during prayer on Rosh HaShana?


###### Eruvin 40a:12
[Eruvin 40a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:12)

לֹא, לְהַתְנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara refutes this proof: **No,** they disagree about whether **to make a condition.** The novelty in Rabbi Dosa’s teaching was not that mention must be made of the New Moon, but that a condition must be made due to the day’s uncertain status. The Rabbis disagree about that.


###### Eruvin 40a:13
[Eruvin 40a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:13)

הָכִי נָמֵי מִסְתַּבְּרָא, מִדְּקָתָנֵי בְּבָרַיְיתָא: וְכֵן הָיָה רַבִּי דּוֹסָא עוֹשֶׂה בְּרָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים שֶׁל כׇּל הַשָּׁנָה כּוּלָּהּ, וְלֹא הוֹדוּ לוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **So too, it is reasonable** to say that the dispute between Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis relates to the condition and not to the very mention of the New Moon. This can be ascertained **from** the fact **that it was taught in a *baraita*: And so too, Rabbi Dosa would do** this **on** all **the New Moons** for which two days are kept out of doubt **the entire year; and** the Rabbis **did not agree with him.**


###### Eruvin 40a:14
[Eruvin 40a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:14)

אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא לְהַתְנוֹת — מִשּׁוּם הָכִי לֹא הוֹדוּ לוֹ. אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ לְהַזְכִּיר — אַמַּאי לֹא הוֹדוּ לוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Granted, if you say** that the disagreement was about whether **to make a condition, that is why they did not agree with him** with regard to the New Moon throughout the year, as they did not accept the whole idea of a conditional prayer. **But if you say** the main point of contention was whether **to mention** the New Moon at all, **why didn’t they agree with him** that the New Moon should be mentioned during prayer the rest of the year?


###### Eruvin 40a:15
[Eruvin 40a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:15)

וְאֶלָּא מַאי — לְהַתְנוֹת? לְמָה לִי לְאִיפְּלוֹגֵי בְּתַרְתֵּי? צְרִיכָא, דְּאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה — הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: בְּהָא קָאָמְרִי רַבָּנַן דְּלָא — מִשּׁוּם דְּאָתֵי לְזַלְזוֹלֵי בֵּיהּ, אֲבָל בְּרָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים שֶׁל כׇּל הַשָּׁנָה כּוּלָּהּ — אֵימָא מוֹדוּ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי דּוֹסָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Rather, what** is the disagreement about, whether or not **to make a condition? Why do I** need them **to disagree in two** cases? The issue is the same on Rosh HaShana as on any other New Moon. The Gemara answers: **It was necessary** to teach both cases, **as, if he had** only **taught us** the *halakha* with regard to **Rosh HaShana, I might have said** that only **in this** case **did the Rabbis say that one should not** mention the New Moon in a conditional manner **because people might come to demean** the day and perform prohibited labor. **But in** the case of an ordinary **New Moon throughout the year,** I might **say** that perhaps **they agree with Rabbi Dosa,** since labor is not prohibited on the New Moon, and therefore there is no reason for concern lest people come to treat it lightly.


###### Eruvin 40a:16
[Eruvin 40a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:16)

וְאִי אִתְּמַר בְּהָא — בְּהָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי דּוֹסָא, אֲבָל בְּהָךְ — אֵימָא מוֹדֶה לְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן. צְרִיכָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if** the disagreement **had** only **been stated in this** case, in the case of an ordinary New Moon, one might say that only **in this** case **did Rabbi Dosa say** that a condition may be made. **But in that** other case of Rosh HaShana, I might **say** that **he agrees with the Rabbis,** due to concern lest people will come to treat the Festival lightly. It was therefore **necessary** to state the disagreement in both cases.


###### Eruvin 40a:17
[Eruvin 40a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/40a:17)

מֵיתִיבִי: רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: מִתְפַּלֵּל עֶשֶׂר, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: מִתְפַּלֵּל תֵּשַׁע. וְאִם אִיתָא, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** based on the *Tosefta* that states that in the case of **Rosh HaShana that occurs on Shabbat, Beit Shammai say: One prays** an *Amida* that contains **ten** blessings, including the nine blessings ordinarily recited on Rosh HaShana and an additional blessing in which Shabbat is mentioned. **And Beit Hillel say: One prays** an *Amida* that contains **nine** blessings, as Shabbat and the Festival are mentioned in the same blessing. **And if there were** an opinion that held that the New Moon must be separately mentioned in the Rosh HaShana prayer, then **it should** say that according to **Beit Shammai,** one must recite **eleven** blessings, i.e., nine for Rosh HaShana, one for Shabbat, and one for the New Moon.