## Eruvin Daf 41b

###### Eruvin 41b:1
[Eruvin 41b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:1)

דְּאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ אַכּוּלְּהוּ — הָא בָּעֵי מִינֵּיהּ רַבָּה מֵרַב יְהוּדָה וְלָא פְּשַׁט לֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**as, if it should enter your mind** to say that Rav Yehuda said that the *halakha* is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis with regard **to all** the cases in the mishna, including that of the Ninth of Av that occurs on Shabbat eve, there is a difficulty: **Didn’t Rabba raise a dilemma before Rav Yehuda** with regard to this issue, **and he did not answer him?** This demonstrates that he did not have a decisive ruling on this subject.


###### Eruvin 41b:2
[Eruvin 41b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:2)

וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, הָא דְּדָרֵשׁ מָר זוּטְרָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא: הֲלָכָה, מִתְעַנֶּה וּמַשְׁלִים. הָא בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבָּה מֵרַב הוּנָא וְלָא פְּשַׁט לֵיהּ?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **And according to your opinion,** that the issue had not been resolved, there is a difficulty with **that** which **Mar Zutra expounded in the name of Rav Huna:** The ***halakha*** is that **one fasts and completes** the fast on Shabbat eve. **Didn’t Rabba** also **raise** this **dilemma before Rav Huna, and he** too **did not answer him?** How could Mar Zutra have reported this halakhic ruling in the name of Rav Huna?


###### Eruvin 41b:3
[Eruvin 41b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:3)

אֶלָּא: הָא — מִקַּמֵּי דְּשַׁמְעַהּ, וְהָא — לְבָתַר דְּשַׁמְעַהּ, הָכָא נָמֵי: הָא — מִקַּמֵּי דְּשַׁמְעַהּ, הָא — לְבָתַר דְּשַׁמְעַהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** you must say that **this** dilemma that Rabba raised to Rav Huna was **before** Rav Huna **heard** Rav’s ruling on the subject; whereas **this,** i.e., Rav Huna’s statement as cited by Mar Zutra, was made **after he heard** Rav’s ruling on the matter, and the problem was resolved for him. **Here, too,** with regard to Rav Yehuda, we can say that **this** dilemma that Rabba raised before Rav Yehuda was **before** Rav Yehuda **heard** Rav’s ruling on the topic, and therefore he did not know how to answer Rabba; whereas **this,** i.e., Rav Yehuda’s statement in the name of Rav, was made **after he heard it.**


###### Eruvin 41b:4
[Eruvin 41b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:4)

דָּרֵשׁ מָר זוּטְרָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא: הֲלָכָה, מִתְעַנִּין וּמַשְׁלִימִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara repeats the statement cited above in passing: **Mar Zutra expounded in the name of Rav Huna:** The ***halakha*** is that **one fasts and completes** the fast on the eves of Shabbat and Festivals.


###### Eruvin 41b:5
[Eruvin 41b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:5)

**הַדְרָן עֲלָךְ בַּכֹּל מְעָרְבִין**


###### Eruvin 41b:6
[Eruvin 41b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:6)

מַתְנִי׳ **מִי שֶׁהוֹצִיאוּהוּ** נׇכְרִים, אוֹ רוּחַ רָעָה — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one whom gentiles** forcibly **took him out** beyond the Shabbat limit, **or** if **an evil spirit** took him out, i.e., he was temporarily insane, and found himself outside the Shabbat limit, he **has only four cubits** that he may walk from where he is standing.


###### Eruvin 41b:7
[Eruvin 41b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:7)

הֶחְזִירוּהוּ — כְּאִילּוּ לֹא יָצָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the gentiles **returned him,** or if he came back while still under the influence of the evil spirit, **it is as though he had never left** his Shabbat limit, and he may move about within his original limit as before.


###### Eruvin 41b:8
[Eruvin 41b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:8)

הוֹלִיכוּהוּ לְעִיר אַחֶרֶת, נְתָנוּהוּ בְּדִיר אוֹ בְּסַהַר, רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמְרִים: מְהַלֵּךְ אֶת כּוּלָּהּ. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמְרִים: אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the gentiles **brought him to a different city** that was surrounded by walls, or if they **put him into a pen or a stable,** i.e., animal enclosures, the Sages disagree. **Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya say: He may walk** about **the entire** city, as the whole city is considered like four cubits. **Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva say: He has only four cubits** from where he was placed.


###### Eruvin 41b:9
[Eruvin 41b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:9)

מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבָּאוּ מִפְּלַנְדַּרְסִין, וְהִפְלִיגָה סְפִינָתָם בַּיָּם. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה הָלְכוּ אֶת כּוּלָּהּ, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא לֹא זָזוּ מֵאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, שֶׁרָצוּ לְהַחֲמִיר עַל עַצְמָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna relates: There was **an incident where** all of these Sages **were coming from Pelandarsin,** an overseas location, **and their boat set sail on the sea** on Shabbat, taking them beyond their Shabbat limit. **Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya walked** about **the entire** boat, as they hold that the entire boat is considered like four cubits, while **Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva did not move beyond four cubits, as they sought to be stringent with themselves.**


###### Eruvin 41b:10
[Eruvin 41b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:10)

פַּעַם אַחַת לֹא נִכְנְסוּ לַנָּמָל עַד שֶׁחָשֵׁיכָה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: מָה אָנוּ לֵירֵד?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna further relates that on **one occasion, they did not enter the port [*namel*] until after nightfall** on Shabbat eve. The others **said to Rabban Gamliel: What** is the *halakha* with regard to **alighting** from the boat at this time? In other words, were we already within the city’s limit before Shabbat commenced?


###### Eruvin 41b:11
[Eruvin 41b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:11)

אָמַר לָהֶם: מוּתָּרִים אַתֶּם, שֶׁכְּבָר הָיִיתִי מִסְתַּכֵּל וְהָיִינוּ בְּתוֹךְ הַתְּחוּם עַד שֶׁלֹּא חָשֵׁיכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**He said to them: You are permitted** to alight, **as I was watching, and** I observed that **we were** already **within the** city’s **limit before nightfall.** We acquired our resting place in the city during the twilight period. Therefore, it is permitted to walk throughout the city even after nightfall.


###### Eruvin 41b:12
[Eruvin 41b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:12)

**גְּמָ׳** תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: שְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים מַעֲבִירִין אֶת הָאָדָם עַל דַּעְתּוֹ וְעַל דַּעַת קוֹנוֹ, אֵלּוּ הֵן: נׇכְרִים, וְרוּחַ רָעָה, וְדִקְדּוּקֵי עֲנִיּוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** Since the Gemara discussed one who stepped beyond the Shabbat limit due to an evil spirit, the Gemara cites a related *baraita*, in which **the Sages taught: Three matters cause a person to act against his** own **will and the will of his Maker,** and **they are: Gentiles, and an evil spirit, and the depths of** extreme **poverty.**


###### Eruvin 41b:13
[Eruvin 41b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:13)

לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ? לְמִיבְעֵי רַחֲמֵי עֲלַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is the** practical halakhic **difference** that emerges from this statement? The Gemara answers: It is significant as it teaches one **to request mercy for** people who suffer from those problems.


###### Eruvin 41b:14
[Eruvin 41b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:14)

שְׁלֹשָׁה אֵין רוֹאִין פְּנֵי גֵיהִנָּם, אֵלּוּ הֵן: דִּקְדּוּקֵי עֲנִיּוּת, וְחוֹלֵי מֵעַיִין, וְהָרְשׁוּת. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אִשָּׁה רָעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites a related teaching: **Three** classes of people **do not see the face of Gehenna,** because the suffering that they bear in this world atones for their sins, and **they are:** Those suffering **the depths of** extreme **poverty,** those afflicted **with intestinal disease, and** those oppressed by **creditors. And some say: Even one who has an evil wife** who constantly harasses him.


###### Eruvin 41b:15
[Eruvin 41b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:15)

וְאִידָּךְ? אִשָּׁה רָעָה מִצְוָה לְגָרְשָׁהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** why don’t **the other** Sages include one with an evil wife among those who will not be punished in Gehenna? The Gemara answers: They maintain that **it is a mitzva to divorce an evil wife.** Therefore, that source of distress can be remedied.


###### Eruvin 41b:16
[Eruvin 41b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:16)

וְאִידָּךְ? זִימְנִין דִּכְתוּבָּתָהּ מְרוּבָּה. אִי נָמֵי, אִית לֵיהּ בָּנִים מִינַּהּ, וְלָא מָצֵי מְגָרֵשׁ לַהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** why do **the other** Sages include an evil wife? The Gemara answers: **Sometimes** payment of **her marriage contract is** very **large,** and consequently he cannot divorce her since he cannot afford to pay it. **Alternatively, he has children from her,** and he cannot raise them himself, **and** therefore he **cannot divorce her.**


###### Eruvin 41b:17
[Eruvin 41b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:17)

לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ? לְקַבּוֹלֵי מֵאַהֲבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is the** practical halakhic **difference** that emerges from this statement? The Gemara answers: It is significant as it teaches one **to accept** those afflictions **with love,** knowing that they will exempt him from the punishment of Gehenna.


###### Eruvin 41b:18
[Eruvin 41b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:18)

שְׁלֹשָׁה מֵתִין כְּשֶׁהֵן מְסַפְּרִין, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: חוֹלִי מֵעַיִין, וְחַיָּה, וְהִדְרוֹקָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It was similarly taught: **Three** classes of people are liable to **die while conversing** with others, i.e., to die suddenly, although they appear to be in good health and are capable of engaging in conversation, **and they are: Those** afflicted **with intestinal sickness, and a woman in childbirth, and** one who is sick with **edema [*hidrokan*].**


###### Eruvin 41b:19
[Eruvin 41b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:19)

לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ: לְמַשְׁמוֹשֵׁי בְּהוּ זְוַודְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Once again the Gemara asks: **What is the** practical halakhic **difference** that emerges from this statement? The Gemara answers: It is significant as it teaches one **to prepare shrouds for them,** in case they need them suddenly.


###### Eruvin 41b:20
[Eruvin 41b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:20)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: יָצָא לְדַעַת — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. פְּשִׁיטָא, הַשְׁתָּא מִי שֶׁהוֹצִיאוּהוּ נׇכְרִים אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, יָצָא לְדַעַת מִיבַּעְיָא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara proceeds to analyze the mishna: **Rav Naḥman said** that **Shmuel said: If one knowingly went out** beyond the Shabbat limit, **he has only four cubits** that he may walk. The Gemara asks: This is **obvious. Now,** if with regard to **one whom gentiles** forcibly **took out** beyond the Shabbat limit, **he has only four cubits,** with regard to **one who knowingly went out, is it necessary** to teach that he has no more than four cubits within which he may walk?


###### Eruvin 41b:21
[Eruvin 41b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:21)

אֶלָּא אֵימָא: חָזַר לְדַעַת — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, say** that Rav Naḥman’s statement means: If **he returned knowingly** to within the Shabbat limit after having been taken out by gentiles, **he has only four cubits** within which he may walk, but no more.


###### Eruvin 41b:22
[Eruvin 41b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:22)

הָא נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: הֶחְזִירוּהוּ נׇכְרִים כְּאִילּוּ לֹא יָצָא. הֶחְזִירוּהוּ הוּא דִּכְאִילּוּ לֹא יָצָא, אֲבָל הוֹצִיאוּהוּ נׇכְרִים וְחָזַר לְדַעַת — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **This, too, we learned** from a precise reading of the mishna: If the gentiles **returned him** to within the Shabbat limit **it is as though he had never left** the Shabbat limit, and he may move about as before. By inference, **it is** specifically when the gentiles themselves **returned him that it is as though he never left** his Shabbat limit. **However, if gentiles took him out, and** then he **returned knowingly** to his Shabbat limit, it is as though he left knowingly, and he **has only four cubits** within which he may walk.


###### Eruvin 41b:23
[Eruvin 41b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:23)

אֶלָּא אֵימָא, יָצָא לְדַעַת וְהֶחְזִירוּהוּ נׇכְרִים — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, say** Rav Naḥman’s statement as follows: If **he knowingly went out** beyond the Shabbat limit, **and was** later forcibly **returned by gentiles** to within his limit, **he has only four cubits** that he may walk, although he was restored to within his limit against his will.


###### Eruvin 41b:24
[Eruvin 41b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:24)

הָא נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: הוֹצִיאוּהוּ וְהֶחְזִירוּהוּ כְּאִילּוּ לֹא יָצָא. הוֹצִיאוּהוּ וְהֶחְזִירוּהוּ — הוּא דִּכְאִילּוּ לֹא יָצָא, אֲבָל יָצָא לְדַעַת — לָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **This, too, we learned from** a precise reading of the mishna: If gentiles forcibly **took him out and** later **returned him, it is as though he never left.** By inference, **it is** specifically when the gentiles themselves forcibly **took him out and** then themselves **returned him** that **it is as though he never left** the Shabbat limit. **However, if he knowingly went out, no,** that is not the *halakha*, even if he was later forcibly returned by gentiles.


###### Eruvin 41b:25
[Eruvin 41b:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:25)

מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא, לִצְדָדִין קָתָנֵי: מִי שֶׁהוֹצִיאוּהוּ נׇכְרִים וְחָזַר לְדַעַת — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, אֲבָל יָצָא לְדַעַת וְהֶחְזִירוּהוּ נׇכְרִים — כְּאִילּוּ לֹא יָצָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Rav Naḥman’s statement is necessary **lest you say** that perhaps the mishna is not referring to one specific case, but rather **it is teaching disjunctively,** i.e., referring to two separate cases, as follows: **One who was** forcibly **taken out** beyond the Shabbat limit **by gentiles and** later **returned knowingly has only four cubits** within which to walk. **But if he knowingly went out** beyond the Shabbat limit **and was** later forcibly **returned by gentiles, it is as though he had never left,** and he may move within his original limit as before. Therefore, Rav Naḥman **teaches us** that if he willingly went out beyond the Shabbat limit and was later forcibly returned by gentiles, it is considered as though he had returned knowingly, so that he has only four cubits within which to walk.


###### Eruvin 41b:26
[Eruvin 41b:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:26)

בְּעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַבָּה: הוּצְרַךְ לִנְקָבָיו מַהוּ? אָמַר לָהֶם: גָּדוֹל כְּבוֹד הַבְּרִיּוֹת שֶׁדּוֹחֶה אֶת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**They raised a dilemma before Rabba:** If a person who is restricted to an area of four cubits **needed to relieve himself** and no secluded spot is available, **what is** the *halakha*? **He said to them:** The Sages established a principle that **great** is **human dignity, which** even **supersedes a negative precept of the Torah,** and therefore a person is permitted to overstep the Shabbat limit fixed by the Sages in order to relieve himself modestly.


###### Eruvin 41b:27
[Eruvin 41b:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:27)

אָמְרִי נְהַרְדָּעֵי: אִי פִּיקֵּחַ הוּא עָיֵיל לִתְחוּמָא, וְכֵיוָן דְּעָל — עָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages **of Neharde’a said: If** this person **is clever, he will enter** into his original Shabbat limit, **and since he** was permitted to **enter** it, **he entered,** and may remain there.


###### Eruvin 41b:28
[Eruvin 41b:28](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:28)

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: פֵּירוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ חוּץ לַתְּחוּם וְחָזְרוּ, אֲפִילּוּ בְּמֵזִיד — לֹא הִפְסִידוּ אֶת מְקוֹמָן. מַאי טַעְמָא? אֲנוּסִין נִינְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa said:** With regard to **produce that was taken out beyond the** Shabbat **limit and was** later **returned, even if** this was done **intentionally,** the produce **has not lost its place;** rather, it may still be carried within the entire limit. **What is the reason** for this *halakha*? It is that the produce did not go out willingly, but was taken **due to circumstances beyond its control.**


###### Eruvin 41b:29
[Eruvin 41b:29](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:29)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב יוֹסֵף בַּר שְׁמַעְיָה לְרַב פָּפָּא: רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמְרִים: לְעוֹלָם אֲסוּרִין, עַד שֶׁיַּחְזְרוּ לִמְקוֹמָן שׁוֹגְגִין. בְּשׁוֹגֵג אִין, בְּמֵזִיד לָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef bar Shemaya raised an objection to** the opinion of **Rav Pappa** from a *baraita*: **Rabbi Neḥemya and Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov say:** It **is actually prohibited** to carry the produce beyond four cubits, **unless it was returned to its place unwittingly.** By inference, if it was returned **unwittingly, yes,** it is permitted, but if it was returned **intentionally,** it is **not.**


###### Eruvin 41b:30
[Eruvin 41b:30](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/41b:30)

תַּנָּאֵי הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא: פֵּירוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ חוּץ לַתְּחוּם, בְּשׁוֹגֵג — יֵאָכֵלוּ, בְּמֵזִיד — לֹא יֵאָכֵלוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: This **is** subject to a dispute between **the *tanna’im*, as it was taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **produce that was taken out beyond the** Shabbat **limit,** if it was taken out **unwittingly, it may be eaten;** but if it was taken out **intentionally, it may not be eaten.**