## Eruvin Daf 57b

###### Eruvin 57b:1
[Eruvin 57b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:1)

הָא מַנִּי — רַבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In accordance with **whose** opinion is **this** clause of the mishna? **It is** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** who maintains that one allocates a *karpef* to each city.


###### Eruvin 57b:2
[Eruvin 57b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:2)

אִי רַבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא, הָא תָּנֵי לֵיהּ רֵישָׁא: נוֹתְנִין קַרְפֵּף לָעִיר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues to ask: **If it is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, didn’t we** already **learn in the first clause: One allocates a *karpef* to** each **city;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir?** What need is there to mention Rabbi Meir’s opinion again?


###### Eruvin 57b:3
[Eruvin 57b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:3)

צְרִיכָא, דְּאִי מֵהַהִיא, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: חַד לַחֲדָא, וְחַד לְתַרְתֵּי. קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דִּלְתַרְתֵּי תְּרֵי יָהֲבִינַן לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **It was necessary** to mention his opinion again, **as, if** we had learned his opinion only **from that** first clause, **I might have said** that one allocates **one** *karpef* **for one** city **and** also **one** *karpef* **for two** cities. Therefore, the mishna **teaches us that for two** cities, **one allocates two** *karpef* areas.


###### Eruvin 57b:4
[Eruvin 57b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:4)

וְאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן הָכָא, מִשּׁוּם דִּדְחִיקָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתַּיְיהוּ, אֲבָל הָתָם דְּלָא דְּחִיקָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתַּיְיהוּ, אֵימָא לָא, צְרִיכָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** conversely, **if** the mishna had **taught us** this law only **here,** with regard to two cities, one might have said that only in that case is each city granted a separate *karpef*, **because** a smaller space between the two adjacent cities would be too **crowded for the use** of both cities. **But there,** with regard to one city, **where** the area of the city itself **is not** too **crowded for the use of** its residents, one might **say** that it is **not** given any *karpef* whatsoever. Therefore, it was **necessary** for the mishna to teach both clauses.


###### Eruvin 57b:5
[Eruvin 57b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:5)

תְּנַן: וְכֵן שְׁלֹשָׁה כְּפָרִים הַמְשׁוּלָּשִׁין, אִם יֵשׁ בֵּין שְׁנַיִם הַחִיצוֹנִים מֵאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים וְאַחַת אַמָּה וּשְׁלִישׁ — עוֹשֶׂה אֶמְצָעִי אֶת שְׁלָשְׁתָּן לִהְיוֹת אֶחָד. טַעְמָא דְּאִיכָּא אֶמְצָעִי, הָא לֵיכָּא אֶמְצָעִי — לֹא. תְּיוּבְתָּא דְרַב הוּנָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara tries again to adduce proof from the mishna, in which **we learned: And likewise,** in the case of **three villages that are aligned** in a row, **if there is** only **141⅓** cubits separating **between the two outer ones,** the **middle** village **combines the three** villages **into one.** At this point the Gemara understands that the mishna here is dealing with three villages arranged in a straight line. Therefore, it makes the following inference: **The reason** that the three villages are considered as one **is** only because **there is a middle** village, **but were there no middle** village, they would **not** be considered as one. This appears to be **a conclusive refutation of** the opinion of **Rav Huna.** According to Rav Huna, the two villages should be considered as one even without the middle village, due to the double *karpef*.


###### Eruvin 57b:6
[Eruvin 57b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:6)

אָמַר לְךָ רַב הוּנָא: הָא אִתְּמַר עֲלַהּ, אָמַר רַבָּה אָמַר רַב אִידִי אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: לֹא מְשׁוּלָּשִׁין מַמָּשׁ, אֶלָּא רוֹאִין כׇּל שֶׁאִילּוּ מֵטִיל אֶמְצָעִי בֵּינֵיהֶן וְיִהְיוּ מְשׁוּלָּשִׁין, וְאֵין בֵּין זֶה לָזֶה אֶלָּא מֵאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה וְאַחַת וּשְׁלִישׁ — עָשָׂה אֶמְצָעִי אֶת שְׁלָשְׁתָּן לִהְיוֹת אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **Rav Huna** could have **said to you: Wasn’t it stated with regard to** that mishna that **Rabba said** that **Rav Idi said** that **Rabbi Ḥanina said:** It does **not** mean that the villages are **actually aligned** in a row of **three** villages in a straight line. **Rather,** even if the middle village is off to one side and the outer villages are more than two *karpef* lengths apart, **we see** their spacing and make the following assessment: **Any** case **where, if the middle** village **were placed between** the other two **so that they were three** villages **aligned** in a row, **there would be only** a distance of **141⅓ cubits between one and the other,** then the **middle** village **turns the three** villages **into one.** According to this explanation, the mishna can be understood even as a support for the opinion of Rav Huna.


###### Eruvin 57b:7
[Eruvin 57b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:7)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא לְאַבָּיֵי: כַּמָּה יְהֵא בֵּין חִיצוֹן לָאֶמְצָעִי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to this case, **Rava said to Abaye: How much** distance can **there be between an outer** village **and the middle one,** if the latter is still to combine the three villages into one? Abaye **said to him: Two thousand cubits.**


###### Eruvin 57b:8
[Eruvin 57b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:8)

וְהָא אַתְּ הוּא דְּאָמְרַתְּ: כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרָבָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא מִסְתַּבְּרָא, דְּאָמַר: יוֹתֵר מֵאַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava replied: **Wasn’t it you** yourself **who said: It is reasonable** to rule **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rava, son of Rabba bar Rav Huna, who said:** The Shabbat limit of a bow-shaped city is measured from the imaginary bowstring stretched between the two ends of the city, even if the distance between the center of the string and the center of the bow is **more than two thousand cubits.** Why shouldn’t the three villages in this case be considered a single village also, even if they are separated by more than two thousand cubits?


###### Eruvin 57b:9
[Eruvin 57b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:9)

הָכִי הַשְׁתָּא? הָתָם, אִיכָּא בָּתִּים. הָכָא, לֵיכָּא בָּתִּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye rejected the comparison: **How can you compare? There,** in the case of the bow-shaped city, **there are houses** that combine the city into a single unit, whereas **here, there are no houses** linking the outer villages. Therefore, if two villages are separated by more than two thousand cubits, the measure of the Shabbat limit, they cannot be considered a single entity.


###### Eruvin 57b:10
[Eruvin 57b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:10)

וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא לְאַבָּיֵי: כַּמָּה יְהֵא בֵּין חִיצוֹן לְחִיצוֹן? כַּמָּה יְהֵא?! מַאי נָפְקָא לָךְ מִינַּהּ? כׇּל שֶׁאִילּוּ מַכְנִיס אֶמְצָעִי בֵּינֵיהֶן וְאֵין בֵּין זֶה לָזֶה אֶלָּא מֵאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים וְאַחַת וּשְׁלִישׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rava said to Abaye: How much** distance can **there be between** one **outer** village **and** the other **outer** village? Abaye expressed surprise at this question: **How much** distance can **there be** between them? **What is the** practical **difference to you? Any** case **where, if the middle** village **were placed between them, there would be only** a distance of **141⅓** cubits **between one and the other,** the middle village turns the three villages into one. Therefore, the critical detail is not the distance between the outer villages but the size of the middle village.


###### Eruvin 57b:11
[Eruvin 57b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:11)

וַאֲפִילּוּ אַרְבַּעַת אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין. וְהָאָמַר רַב הוּנָא: עִיר הָעֲשׂוּיָה כְּקֶשֶׁת, אִם יֵשׁ בֵּין שְׁנֵי רָאשֶׁיהָ פָּחוֹת מֵאַרְבַּעַת אֲלָפִים אַמָּה מוֹדְדִין לָהּ מִן הַיֶּתֶר, וְאִם לָאו מוֹדְדִין לָהּ מִן הַקֶּשֶׁת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava continued his line of questioning: Is this true **even** if the distance between the two outer villages is **four thousand cubits?** Abaye **said to him: Yes.** Rava asked: **Didn’t Rav Huna say** the following with regard to **a city shaped like a bow: If** the distance **between its two ends is less than four thousand cubits, one measures** the Shabbat limit **from the** imaginary **bowstring** stretched between the two ends of the bow; **and if not, one measures** the Shabbat limit **from the bow** itself? This indicates that even if there is an uninterrupted string of houses linking the two ends of the city, if the two ends are separated by more than four thousand cubits, the distance is too great for it to be considered a single city.


###### Eruvin 57b:12
[Eruvin 57b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָתָם לֵיכָּא לְמֵימַר ״מַלֵּי״. הָכָא אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר ״מַלֵּי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye **said to him: There,** in the case of the bow-shaped city, **there is no** room **to say: Fill** it in, as there is nothing with which to fill in the empty space between the two ends of the city. However, **here,** in the case of the villages, **there is** room **to say: Fill** it in, as the middle village is seen as though it were projected between the two outer villages, and therefore all three combine into a single village.


###### Eruvin 57b:13
[Eruvin 57b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב סָפְרָא לְרָבָא: הֲרֵי בְּנֵי אֲקִיסְטְפוֹן, דְּמָשְׁחִינַן לְהוּ תְּחוּמָא מֵהַאי גִּיסָא דְּאַרְדָּשִׁיר, וּבְנֵי תְּחוּמָא דְאַרְדָּשִׁיר מָשְׁחִינַן לְהוּ תְּחוּמָא מֵהַאי גִּיסָא דַּאֲקִיסְטְפוֹן. הָא אִיכָּא דִּגְלַת דְּמַפְסְקָא יָתֵר מִמֵּאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים וְאַחַת וּשְׁלִישׁ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Safra said to Rava:** With regard to **the people of** the city of **Akistefon, for whom we measure the** Shabbat **limit from the** far **end of** the city of **Ardeshir, and the people of Ardeshir, for whom we measure the** Shabbat **limit from the** far **end of Akistefon,** as though the two settlements were a single city; **isn’t there the Tigris** River, **which separates them by more than 141⅓** cubits? How can two cities that are separated by more than two *karpef*-lengths be considered a single entity?


###### Eruvin 57b:14
[Eruvin 57b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:14)

נְפַק, אַחְוִי לֵיהּ הָנָךְ אַטְמָהָתָא דְשׁוּרָא, דְּמִבַּלְעִי בְּדִגְלַת בְּשִׁבְעִים אַמָּה וְשִׁירַיִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava **went out** and **showed** Rav Safra **the foundations of a wall** of one of the cities, **which were submerged in the Tigris** River **at** a distance of **seventy cubits and a remainder** from the other city. In other words, the two cities were in fact linked through the remnants of a wall submerged in the river.


###### Eruvin 57b:15
[Eruvin 57b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:15)

**מַתְנִי׳** אֵין מוֹדְדִין אֶלָּא בְּחֶבֶל שֶׁל חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה, לֹא פָּחוֹת וְלֹא יוֹתֵר. וְלֹא יִמְדּוֹד אֶלָּא כְּנֶגֶד לִבּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **One may measure** a Shabbat limit **only with a rope fifty cubits** long, **no less and no more,** as will be explained in the Gemara. **And one may measure** the limit **only at the level of one’s heart,** i.e., whoever comes to measure the limit must hold the rope next to his chest.


###### Eruvin 57b:16
[Eruvin 57b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/57b:16)

הָיָה מוֹדֵד וְהִגִּיעַ לְגַיְא אוֹ לְגָדֵר, מַבְלִיעוֹ, וְחוֹזֵר לְמִדָּתוֹ. הִגִּיעַ לְהַר, מַבְלִיעוֹ וְחוֹזֵר לְמִדָּתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **one was measuring** the limit **and he reached a canyon or a fence,** the height of the fence and the depth of the canyon are not counted toward the two thousand cubits; rather, **he spans it and** then **resumes his measurement.** Two people hold the two ends of the rope straight across the canyon or the fence, and the distance is measured as though the area were completely flat. If **one reached a hill,** he does not measure its height; rather, **he spans** the hill as if it were not there **and** then **resumes his measurement,**