## Eruvin Daf 42b

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

הָיָה מוֹדֵד וּבָא, וְכָלְתָה מִדָּתוֹ בַּחֲצִי הָעִיר — מוּתָּר לְטַלְטֵל בְּכׇל הָעִיר כּוּלָּהּ, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲבוֹר אֶת הַתְּחוּם בְּרַגְלָיו. מַאי מְטַלְטֵל, לָאו עַל יְדֵי זְרִיקָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If a person **was measuring** the two thousand cubits of his Shabbat limit from the spot where he deposited his *eiruv*, **and his measuring ended in the middle of the city, he is permitted to carry throughout the city, provided that he does not overstep the limit by foot,** i.e., that he does not walk beyond his permitted limit in the middle of the city. If he cannot walk about on foot, **how can he carry** throughout the city? Is it **not by means of throwing?** This presents a difficulty for Rav Huna, who prohibits carrying by means of throwing in a place where it is prohibited to walk.


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

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: לָא, עַל יְדֵי מְשִׁיכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna said: No,** it means that he may carry in the city **by means of pulling,** i.e., he is permitted to pull objects from the other side of the city to the side where he is permitted to walk, for in this manner there is no concern that he might be drawn after the object, since he is bringing the object to him.


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

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: הָיָה מוֹדֵד וּבָא, וְכָלְתָה מִדָּתוֹ בַּחֲצִי חָצֵר — אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא חֲצִי חָצֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, **Rav Huna said:** If a person **was measuring** the two thousand cubits of his Shabbat limit from the spot where he deposited his *eiruv*, **and his measuring ended in the middle of a courtyard, he has only half the courtyard** in which to walk.


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

פְּשִׁיטָא! אֵימָא: יֵשׁ לוֹ חֲצִי חָצֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: It is **obvious** that he is not permitted to walk beyond his Shabbat limit. The Gemara answers: **Read** Rav Huna’s statement as follows: **He has half a courtyard,** i.e., Rav Huna addresses a different aspect of the issue; namely, he permits carrying in half the courtyard.


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

הַאי נָמֵי פְּשִׁיטָא? מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: לֵיחוּשׁ דִּלְמָא אָתֵי לְטַלְטוֹלֵי בְּכוּלַּהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: However, **this too is obvious,** for why should it be prohibited for him to carry in a private domain where he is permitted to walk? The Gemara answers: **Lest you say** that **we should be concerned that** if he is permitted to carry in half the courtyard, **he might come to carry in the entire** courtyard. **Consequently,** Rav Huna **teaches us** that this concern is not taken into account.


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

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, מוֹדֶה לִי הוּנָא: הָיָה מוֹדֵד וּבָא וְכָלְתָה מִדָּתוֹ עַל שְׂפַת תִּקְרָה — מוּתָּר לְטַלְטֵל בְּכׇל הַבַּיִת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman said:** Rav **Huna agrees with me** that carrying is not prohibited in a comparable case, out of concern that the person be drawn after the object he is carrying: If a person **was measuring** the two thousand cubits of his Shabbat limit from the spot where he deposited his *eiruv*, **and his measuring ended at the edge of the roof** of a house, most of which stood outside his Shabbat limit, **he is permitted to carry throughout the house** by means of throwing.


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

מַאי טַעְמָא — הוֹאִיל וְתִקְרַת הַבַּיִת חוֹבֶטֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What is the reason** that Rav Huna agrees in this case? **Because** the edge of **the roof of the house** is regarded as if it **presses** down vertically at the end of his Shabbat limit, thus creating a partition, and so there is no concern that he might pass beyond this partition and be drawn after his object.


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

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נָתָן: כְּתַנָּאֵי. הוֹלִיכוּהוּ לְעִיר אַחֶרֶת, וּנְתָנוּהוּ בְּדִיר אוֹ בְּסַהַר, רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמְרִים: מְהַלֵּךְ אֶת כּוּלָּהּ. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמְרִים: אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, said:** The dispute between Shmuel and Rav Huna is **parallel to** a dispute between ***tanna’im*** recorded in the mishna: If the gentiles **brought him to a different city** beyond his Shabbat limit, **or if they put him in a pen or a stable,** the Sages disagree. **Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya say: He may walk about the entire** stable or pen. Since they are enclosed by a partition, their entire area is considered like only four cubits. **Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva say: He has only four cubits** from where he was deposited.


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

מַאי לָאו, רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה דְּאָמְרוּ: מְהַלֵּךְ אֶת כּוּלָּהּ — דְּלָא גָּזְרִי הִילּוּךְ דִּיר וְסַהַר אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ בְּבִקְעָה;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Is it not** the case that **Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, who said: He may walk about the entire** area, **do not prohibit walking in a pen or a stable due to walking in a field** where one is limited to four cubits? Rather, they say that since the stable is surrounded by partitions, it is not similar to a field, in which a person may not leave his four cubits.


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

וּמִדְּהִילּוּךְ אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ לָא גָּזְרִי, טִלְטוּל אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ לָא גָּזְרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And since they did not prohibit walking** in a pen or a stable **due to** the limits imposed on **walking** in a field, **they would** certainly **not prohibit carrying** in a pen **due to** the limits imposed on **walking** in a field. Rather, they would permit a person to carry in a field that had been enclosed on Shabbat by gentiles, and even to throw into the part lying beyond his two thousand cubits, parallel to the opinion of Shmuel who did not decree against this.


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

וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא דְּאוֹמְרִים: אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, דְּגָזְרִי הִילּוּךְ דִּיר וְסַהַר אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ דְּבִקְעָהּ; וּמִדְּהִילּוּךְ אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ גָּזְרִי, טִלְטוּל אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ נָמֵי גָּזְרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** is it not the case that **Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva, who say** that **he has only four cubits, prohibit walking in a pen or a stable due to** the limits imposed on **walking in a field? And since they prohibit walking** in a pen or a stable **due to** the limits imposed on **walking** in a field, **they would also prohibit carrying** past the two thousand cubit limit by means of throwing **due to** the limits imposed on **walking** past there, in accordance with Rav Huna’s opinion.


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

מִמַּאי? דִּילְמָא כִּי לָא גָּזְרִי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה הִילּוּךְ סַהַר וְדִיר אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ בִּקְעָה, הָנֵי מִילֵּי הָתָם דִּשְׁנֵי מְקוֹמוֹת הֵן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this comparison: **From what** do you infer that this is the case? **Perhaps Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya did not prohibit walking in a pen or a stable due to** the limits imposed on **walking in a field,** but **this applies** only **there, because they are two** distinct **places.** In other words, the pen and stable are enclosed by partitions, while the field is not, and there is no reason to prohibit walking in one place out of concern that one might come to act improperly in a different place.


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

אֲבָל טִלְטוּל אַטּוּ הִילּוּךְ דְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד הוּא, הָכִי נָמֵי דְּגָזְרִי, גְּזֵירָה שֶׁמָּא יִמָּשֵׁךְ אַחֵר חֶפְצוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However,** as for the prohibition of **carrying due to** the limits imposed on **walking,** where **it is** all **one place,** might we **also** say **that** even Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya **would decree** against carrying **as a preventive measure, lest the person be drawn after his object** and come to walk in a place prohibited to him.


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

וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא נָמֵי, מִמַּאי דְּמִשּׁוּם דְּגָזְרִי הוּא? דִּילְמָא מִשּׁוּם דְּקָא סָבְרִי כִּי אָמְרִינַן כָּל הַבַּיִת כּוּלּוֹ כְּאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת דָּמֵי, הָנֵי מִילֵּי הֵיכָא דְּשָׁבַת בַּאֲוִיר מְחִיצּוֹת מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The comparison can also be rejected from another angle: **And** with regard to **Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva too, from what** can it be inferred **that** they prohibit walking beyond four cubits **due to a decree? Perhaps** it is **because they hold** that **when we say that the entire house is considered like four cubits,** this **applies only where one acquired his place of residence within the airspace of** the **partitions** of the house **while it was still day,** i.e., prior to the onset of Shabbat.


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

אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּלֹא שָׁבַת בַּאֲוִיר מְחִיצּוֹת מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However, where he did not acquire his place of residence within the airspace of** the **partitions** of the house **while it was still day,** the house, and all the more so the stable or pen, is **not** considered as four cubits; rather, it is measured based on the actual number of cubits it contains. Based on this explanation, this ruling indicates nothing with regard to the issue of throwing beyond the two-thousand cubit limit. Consequently, the Gemara rejects the link between the dispute of the *tanna’im* in the mishna and that of Rav Naḥman and Rav Huna.


###### Eruvin 42b:16
[Eruvin 42b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42b:16)

אָמַר רַב: הִלְכְתָא כְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בְּדִיר וְסַהַר וּסְפִינָה. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: הִלְכְתָא כְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, בִּסְפִינָה, אֲבָל בְּדִיר וְסַהַר — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav said: The *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabban Gamliel with regard to a pen, a stable, and a boat. And Shmuel said: The *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabban Gamliel with regard to a boat, but not with regard to a stable or a pen.**


###### Eruvin 42b:17
[Eruvin 42b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42b:17)

דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִיהַת הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בִּסְפִינָה, מַאי טַעְמָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara poses a question: **At any rate, all agree,** i.e., both Rav and Shmuel, **that** the ***halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabban Gamliel with regard to a boat. What is the reason** that the *halakha* is different in this case than in the other cases?


###### Eruvin 42b:18
[Eruvin 42b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42b:18)

אָמַר רַבָּה: הוֹאִיל וְשָׁבַת בַּאֲוִיר מְחִיצּוֹת מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said:** This is **since he acquired his place of residence within the partitions** of the boat **while it was still day,** in which case it is reasonable to say that the entire boat is considered as if it is only four cubits.


###### Eruvin 42b:19
[Eruvin 42b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42b:19)

רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר: הוֹאִיל וּסְפִינָה נוֹטַלְתּוֹ מִתְּחִילַּת אַרְבַּע וּמַנַּחְתּוֹ בְּסוֹף אַרְבַּע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Zeira said:** This is **since the boat** constantly moves the person out of his four cubits, **lifting him from the beginning of four** cubits **and placing him at the end of four** cubits. Since in any case he cannot restrict himself to any particular four cubits, even if he wished to do so, it is reasonable to say that he is permitted to walk about the entire boat.


###### Eruvin 42b:20
[Eruvin 42b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42b:20)

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ שֶׁנִּפְחֲתוּ דּוֹפְנֵי סְפִינָה. אִי נָמֵי: בְּקוֹפֵץ מִסְּפִינָה לִסְפִינָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** the practical difference **between** these two explanations? The Gemara answers: **There is** a practical difference **between them** with regard to a case where **the walls of the boat were breached,** so that the person is no longer located between its partitions. **Alternatively,** there is a difference **with regard to** a case **where** the person **jumped from one boat to another,** so that he is no longer on the boat where he had acquired his place of residence. In both of these cases, Rabba’s reason no longer applies, but Rabbi Zeira’s reason does.


###### Eruvin 42b:21
[Eruvin 42b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/42b:21)

וְרַבִּי זֵירָא, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר כְּרַבָּה? אָמַר לָךְ: מְחִיצּוֹת,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: As for **Rabbi Zeira, what is the reason** that he **did not state** his opinion **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabba,** whose explanation is more straightforward? The Gemara answers: He could have **said to you: The sides** of a boat are not regarded as proper partitions,