## Eruvin Daf 42a

###### Eruvin 42a:1
[Eruvin 42a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:1)

רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אוֹמֵר: בִּמְקוֹמָן — יֵאָכֵלוּ, שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹמָן — לֹא יֵאָכֵלוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Neḥemya says:** If the produce was returned and is now **in its** original **place, it may be eaten;** but if it is **not in its** original **place,** i.e., if it is still beyond the Shabbat limit, **it may not be eaten.**


###### Eruvin 42a:2
[Eruvin 42a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:2)

מַאי בִּמְקוֹמָן? אִילֵּימָא: בִּמְקוֹמָן — בְּמֵזִיד, וְהָא קָתָנֵי בְּהֶדְיָא, רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמְרִים: לְעוֹלָם אֲסוּרִין עַד שֶׁיַּחְזְרוּ לִמְקוֹמָן שׁוֹגְגִין. בְּשׁוֹגֵג — אִין, בְּמֵזִיד — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies: **What is** meant by: **In its place? If you say** that the produce was returned to **its place intentionally,** there is a difficulty, **as it was explicitly taught** in 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, only if it was returned **unwittingly** is it **indeed** permitted, but if it was returned **intentionally,** it is **not** permitted.


###### Eruvin 42a:3
[Eruvin 42a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:3)

אֶלָּא לָאו: בִּמְקוֹמָן — בְּשׁוֹגֵג, וְחַסּוֹרֵי מְחַסְּרָא, וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: פֵּירוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ חוּץ לַתְּחוּם, בְּשׁוֹגֵג — יֵאָכֵלוּ, בְּמֵזִיד — לֹא יֵאָכֵלוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** does it **not** mean that the produce was returned **to its place unwittingly, and** the *baraita* **is incomplete and it teaches the following:** 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.**


###### Eruvin 42a:4
[Eruvin 42a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:4)

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹמָן, אֲבָל בִּמְקוֹמָן — אֲפִילּוּ בְּמֵזִיד יֵאָכֵלוּ. וַאֲתָא רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה לְמֵימַר: אֲפִילּוּ בִּמְקוֹמָן נָמֵי, בְּשׁוֹגֵג — אִין, בְּמֵזִיד — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**In what** case **is this statement said?** In a case where the produce is **not in its** original **place,** i.e., it is still beyond the Shabbat limit. **But** if it was returned and is now **in its** original **place, even** if it was returned **intentionally, it may be eaten. And Rabbi Neḥemya came to say: Even** if the produce was returned and is now **in its** original **place,** a distinction applies. If it was returned **unwittingly, yes,** it is permitted; but if it was returned **intentionally,** it is **not.**


###### Eruvin 42a:5
[Eruvin 42a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:5)

לָא, בְּמֵזִיד בִּמְקוֹמָן — דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּאָסוּר, וְהָכָא בְּשׁוֹגֵג שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹמָן פְּלִיגִי: תַּנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר בְּשׁוֹגֵג שְׁרֵי שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹמָן, וְרַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה סָבַר אֲפִילּוּ שׁוֹגֵג, בִּמְקוֹמָן — אִין, שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹמָן — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this explanation: **No,** this is not necessarily the case, as the *baraita* can also be explained as follows: If the produce was returned **intentionally to its place, everyone agrees,** i.e., both the first *tanna* and Rabbi Neḥemya, that **it is forbidden. However, here they disagree with regard to** produce that was **unwittingly** taken out beyond the Shabbat limit and was not returned, so that it is **not in its** original **place. The first *tanna* holds** that if the produce was taken out **unwittingly, it is permitted** to be eaten, even if it is **not in its** original **place.** However, **Rabbi Neḥemya holds** that **even** if the produce was taken out **unwittingly,** if it was returned **to its** original **place,** it **is** permitted; but if it was not returned **to its** original **place,** it is **not** permitted.


###### Eruvin 42a:6
[Eruvin 42a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:6)

וְהָא מִדְּקָתָנֵי סֵיפָא: רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמְרִים: לְעוֹלָם אֲסוּרִין עַד שֶׁיַּחְזְרוּ לִמְקוֹמָן שׁוֹגְגִין, שׁוֹגֵג — אִין, בְּמֵזִיד — לָא, מִכְּלָל דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר: בְּמֵזִיד נָמֵי שְׁרֵי. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects to this reading: **However, since the latter clause** of this *baraita* **teaches** that **Rabbi Neḥemya and Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov say: Actually,** carrying the produce beyond four cubits **is prohibited, unless it was returned to its place unwittingly,** and by inference, only if it was **unwittingly** returned is it **indeed** permitted; however, if it was returned **intentionally,** it is **not** permitted. And since Rabbi Neḥemya maintains that produce that was intentionally returned to its place is forbidden, **by inference, the first *tanna* holds** that even if it was returned **intentionally, it is also permitted.** If so, the preceding explanation cannot be accepted, and the Gemara concludes: Indeed, **learn from here** that Rav Pappa’s opinion is supported by the opinion of the first *tanna*.


###### Eruvin 42a:7
[Eruvin 42a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:7)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ תְּחוּם שַׁבָּת, מְהַלֵּךְ אַלְפַּיִם פְּסִיעוֹת בֵּינוֹנִיּוֹת, וְזוֹ הִיא תְּחוּם שַׁבָּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman said** that **Shmuel said:** If **one was walking** in a certain place **and does not know** where **the Shabbat limit** lies, **he may take two thousand medium strides** in each direction from the spot he acquired as his place of residence, **and this is the Shabbat limit,** for a medium stride is approximately a cubit.


###### Eruvin 42a:8
[Eruvin 42a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:8)

וְאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: שָׁבַת בְּבִקְעָה, וְהִקִּיפוּהָ נׇכְרִים מְחִיצָה בְּשַׁבָּת — מְהַלֵּךְ אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה, וּמְטַלְטֵל בְּכוּלָּהּ עַל יְדֵי זְרִיקָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rav Naḥman** also **said** that **Shmuel said:** If **one established residence in a valley, and gentiles surrounded** the entire area **with a partition** for the purpose of residence **on Shabbat, he may walk** only **two thousand cubits** in each direction, as he cannot rely on partitions that were not present when he acquired his place of residence. However, **he may carry in the entire** partitioned area, as in any other private domain, even in the part that is beyond his two thousand cubits, but only **by means of throwing,** as he himself cannot accompany the object past two thousand cubits.


###### Eruvin 42a:9
[Eruvin 42a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:9)

וְרַב הוּנָא אָמַר: מְהַלֵּךְ אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה, וּמְטַלְטֵל אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. וְנִיטַּלְטֵל בְּכוּלַּהּ עַל יְדֵי זְרִיקָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna said: He may walk two thousand cubits;** however, even within this area **he may carry** objects only a distance of **four cubits,** as in a *karmelit*. The Gemara asks: **And let him** be permitted to **carry in the entire** partitioned area **by means of throwing.** Although he himself is limited in where he may walk, the partitions render it a private domain, and he should be permitted to carry in the entire area.


###### Eruvin 42a:10
[Eruvin 42a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:10)

שֶׁמָּא יִמָּשֵׁךְ אַחַר חֶפְצוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The Sages prohibited this as a preventive measure, **lest he be drawn after his object.** It is prohibited for him to leave the two thousand cubit limit, but were he permitted to carry by means of throwing, he might follow his object and go out beyond his permitted limit.


###### Eruvin 42a:11
[Eruvin 42a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:11)

בְּאַלְפַּיִם מִיהַת לִיטַלְטֵל כִּי אוֹרְחֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Within two thousand** cubits, **at any rate, let him carry** the object **in his usual manner.** Since he may traverse this area, there should be no concern that he might come to be drawn after the object.


###### Eruvin 42a:12
[Eruvin 42a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:12)

מִשּׁוּם דְּהָוֵי כִּמְחִיצָה שֶׁנִּפְרְצָה בִּמְלוֹאָהּ לְמָקוֹם הָאָסוּר לָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that this is prohibited due to another aspect of the laws of *eiruvin*, namely **because this is similar** to the case of **a partition that is breached in its entirety,** leaving the space open **to a place into which it is prohibited** to carry. Since he may not carry more than two thousand cubits, and the enclosed area is larger than two thousand cubits, the area that is permitted to him is breached in its entirety, left open to an area that is prohibited to him. Consequently, carrying is prohibited in the entire area, even by means of throwing.


###### Eruvin 42a:13
[Eruvin 42a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:13)

חִיָּיא בַּר רַב אָמַר: מְהַלֵּךְ אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה, וּמְטַלְטֵל בְּאַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה. כְּמַאן? דְּלָא כְּרַב נַחְמָן וְלָא כְּרַב הוּנָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, **Ḥiyya bar Rav said:** In that case, **he may walk two thousand cubits, and he may** also **carry** objects **within** these **two thousand cubits.** The Gemara poses a question: **In accordance with whose** opinion did Ḥiyya bar Rav issue his ruling? It is **neither in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Naḥman, nor in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Huna,** while this dispute would appear to leave no place for a third opinion.


###### Eruvin 42a:14
[Eruvin 42a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:14)

אֵימָא: מְטַלְטֵל בְּאַרְבַּע. אִי הָכִי, הַיְינוּ דְּרַב הוּנָא. אֵימָא: וְכֵן אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר רַב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Read** Ḥiyya bar Rav’s ruling as follows: **He may carry** objects only a distance of **four** cubits. The Gemara asks: **If so, this is** the same as the opinion **of Rav Huna.** The Gemara answers: **Read** it then as follows: **And similarly, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Rav said.**


###### Eruvin 42a:15
[Eruvin 42a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42a:15)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן לְרַב הוּנָא: לָא תִּיפְלוֹג עֲלֵיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּתַנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ. דְּתַנְיָא:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman said to Rav Huna: Do not argue with** the opinion **of Shmuel** as cited by Rav Naḥman with regard to a field surrounded by a partition on Shabbat, **as it was taught** in a *baraita* **in accordance with his** opinion. **As it was taught** in a *baraita*: