## Eruvin Daf 96b

###### Eruvin 96b:1
[Eruvin 96b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:1)

כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, דְּאָמַר: נָשִׁים סוֹמְכוֹת רְשׁוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, who said:** It is **optional** for **women** to **place** their hands on the head of a sacrificial animal before it is slaughtered. Although only men have this obligation, women may perform that rite if they wish. Similarly, women may perform other mitzvot that they have no obligation to fulfill.


###### Eruvin 96b:2
[Eruvin 96b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:2)

דְּאִי לָא תֵּימָא הָכִי, אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁל יוֹנָה הָיְתָה עוֹלָה לָרֶגֶל וְלֹא מִיחוּ בָּהּ, מִי אִיכָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר רֶגֶל לָאו מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁהַזְּמַן גְּרָמָא הוּא? אֶלָּא קָסָבַר רְשׁוּת, הָכָא נָמֵי רְשׁוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As, if you do not say so,** that this *tanna* holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, the *baraita* states that **Jonah’s wife would ascend** to Jerusalem for **the Festival pilgrimage and** the Sages **did not reprimand her. Is there anyone who says** that the mitzva of **Festival** pilgrimage **is not a time-bound positive mitzva** and that women are obligated to fulfill it? **Rather, he holds** that she did not embark on the pilgrimage as an obligation, but that it was **optional; here, too,** with regard to phylacteries, it is **optional.** Consequently, no proof can be cited from this *baraita* as to whether or not Shabbat is a fit time for phylacteries.


###### Eruvin 96b:3
[Eruvin 96b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:3)

אֶלָּא הַאי תַּנָּא הִיא דְּתַנְיָא: הַמּוֹצֵא תְּפִילִּין, מַכְנִיסָן זוּג זוּג. אֶחָד הָאִישׁ וְאֶחָד הָאִשָּׁה, אֶחָד חֲדָשׁוֹת וְאֶחָד יְשָׁנוֹת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹסֵר בַּחֲדָשׁוֹת, וּמַתִּיר בִּישָׁנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** who is the *tanna* who maintains that Shabbat is a time for phylacteries? **It is this *tanna*** who taught the *halakha*, **as it was taught** in the *Tosefta*: **One who finds phylacteries brings them in pair** by **pair, whether** the finder is **a man or whether** she is **a woman,** and **whether** the phylacteries are **new or whether** they are **old.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda prohibits** bringing in **new** phylacteries since they might merely be amulets in the form of phylacteries, **but** he **permits** bringing in **old** ones, which are certainly valid phylacteries.


###### Eruvin 96b:4
[Eruvin 96b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:4)

עַד כָּאן לָא פְּלִיגִי אֶלָּא בַּחֲדָשׁוֹת וִישָׁנוֹת, אֲבָל בְּאִשָּׁה לָא פְּלִיגִי. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁלֹּא הַזְּמַן גְּרָמָא הוּא, וְכׇל מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁאֵין הַזְּמַן גְּרָמָא נָשִׁים חַיָּיבוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Analysis of this *Tosefta* indicates that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda **disagree only with regard to** the issue of **new** phylacteries **and old ones; however, with regard to a woman** bringing in the phylacteries, **they do not disagree** that it is permitted. **Learn from it** that this *tanna* maintains that donning phylacteries **is a positive mitzva not bound by time, and** since **women are obligated in every positive mitzva not bound by time,** a woman may don these phylacteries and walk into the town.


###### Eruvin 96b:5
[Eruvin 96b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:5)

וְדִילְמָא סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, דְּאָמַר: נָשִׁים סוֹמְכוֹת רְשׁוּת? לָא סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ דְּלָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְלָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara attempts to refute this. **But perhaps** that *tanna* **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, who said:** It is **optional** for **women** to **place** their hands on the head of a sacrificial animal before it is slaughtered. Here too, perhaps it is optional for women to don phylacteries. The Gemara answers: **This cannot enter your mind, as neither Rabbi Meir holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, nor does Rabbi Yehuda hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei,** as the Gemara proceeds to prove.


###### Eruvin 96b:6
[Eruvin 96b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:6)

לָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, דִּתְנַן: אֵין מְעַכְּבִין אֶת הַתִּינוֹקוֹת מִלִּתְקוֹעַ. הָא נָשִׁים מְעַכְּבִין — וּסְתָם מַתְנִיתִין רַבִּי מֵאִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Neither Rabbi Meir holds in accordance** with the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, as we learned** in a mishna: **One** need **not prevent children from sounding** the *shofar* on Rosh HaShana. Although there is an element of prohibition in sounding the *shofar* when there is no obligation to do so, since the children will one day be obligated to sound the *shofar*, one need not prevent them from doing so and learning. It may be inferred from here that **one must prevent women** from sounding the *shofar*. **And an unattributed mishna** is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** indicating that according to Rabbi Meir, a woman does not even have the option of performing a time-bound positive mitzva.


###### Eruvin 96b:7
[Eruvin 96b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:7)

וְלָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, דְּתַנְיָא: ״דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל ... וְסָמַךְ״, בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל סוֹמְכִין וְאֵין בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל סוֹמְכוֹת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: נָשִׁים סוֹמְכוֹת רְשׁוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Nor does Rabbi Yehuda hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, as it was taught** in the *Sifra*, the halakhic *midrash* on Leviticus. The verse states: **“Speak to the sons of Israel…and he shall place** his hands on the head of the burnt-offering” (Leviticus 1:2–4). By inference, **the sons of Israel place** their hands, **but the daughters of Israel do not place** their hands. **Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say:** It is **optional** for **women** to **place** their hands on the head of a sacrificial animal before it is slaughtered.


###### Eruvin 96b:8
[Eruvin 96b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:8)

וּסְתָם סִיפְרָא מַנִּי — רַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And who is** the author of **an unattributed *Sifra*?** It is **Rabbi Yehuda.** This teaching proves that Rabbi Yehuda maintains that women do not have the option of placing their hands on a sacrifice. Neither Rabbi Meir nor Rabbi Yehuda accepts Rabbi Yosei’s opinion that it is optional for women to perform time-bound positive mitzvot; therefore, the *tanna* who cited their opinions that a woman may bring in phylacteries on Shabbat maintains that the mitzva of phylacteries is not time-bound and is in effect even on Shabbat, which is why even women are obligated.


###### Eruvin 96b:9
[Eruvin 96b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:9)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: הַמּוֹצֵא תְּכֵלֶת בַּשּׁוּק, לְשׁוֹנוֹת — פְּסוּלוֹת, חוּטִין — כְּשֵׁרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Elazar said:** With regard to **one who one finds** fabric dyed **sky blue in the marketplace,** if he found **strips** of combed and dyed wool **they are unfit** for use as ritual fringes. The sky blue threads used in ritual fringes must be spun and dyed for the purpose of the mitzva, and these strips might have been dyed for a different purpose. However, if one found sky blue **threads, they are fit** for use in ritual fringes, as it can be assumed they were prepared for that purpose.


###### Eruvin 96b:10
[Eruvin 96b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:10)

מַאי שְׁנָא לְשׁוֹנוֹת, דְּאָמַר: אַדַּעְתָּא דִגְלִימָא צַבְעִינְהוּ? חוּטִין נָמֵי, נֵימָא: אַדַּעְתָּא דִגְלִימָא טְוִינְהוּ! בִּשְׁזוּרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is different** about **strips** that renders them unfit? It is because Rabbi Elazar **said: One dyed** the strips **with the intent** to use them **for a cloak.** If so, with regard to **threads as well, let us say: One spun them with the intent** to use them **for a cloak.** In that case, they too would be deemed unfit. The Gemara answers: Here, it is referring to threads that are **twisted,** which are not typically used for weaving.


###### Eruvin 96b:11
[Eruvin 96b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:11)

שְׁזוּרִים נָמֵי, נֵימָא: אַדַּעְתָּא דְשִׂיפְתָּא דִגְלִימָא עַיְיפִינְהוּ! בְּמוּפְסָקִין, דְּכוּלֵּי הַאי וַדַּאי לָא טָרְחִי אִינָשֵׁי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: With regard to **twisted** threads **as well, let us say** that **one twisted them with the intent** of attaching them to **the hem of a cloak** as ornamentation. The Gemara answers: It is referring to twisted threads **that were cut** into short strings suitable for use as ritual fringes, **as people certainly do not exert** themselves and fashion fringes of a cloak to resemble ritual fringes.


###### Eruvin 96b:12
[Eruvin 96b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:12)

אָמַר רָבָא: וְכִי אָדָם טוֹרֵחַ לַעֲשׂוֹת קָמֵיעַ כְּמִין תְּפִילִּין? דִּתְנַן: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, בִּישָׁנוֹת. אֲבָל בַּחֲדָשׁוֹת — פָּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** The assertion that people do not exert themselves is problematic, **as** by the same token, **does a person exert** himself **to fashion an amulet in the form of phylacteries?** Nevertheless, the Sages were concerned that an object that appears to be phylacteries might actually be a different object. **As we learned** in a mishna: **In what** case **is this statement** that one is permitted to carry phylacteries inside on Shabbat **said?** It is **with regard to old** phylacteries. **However, with regard to new** ones, **he is exempt** from the obligation to bring them in, as it is possible that they are not phylacteries but amulets in the form of phylacteries. Similarly, there should be concern lest people fashion items similar to objects used for a mitzva, even if exertion is involved.


###### Eruvin 96b:13
[Eruvin 96b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:13)

אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא לְאַהֲבָה בְּרֵיהּ: פּוֹק תְּנִי לְהוּ: הַמּוֹצֵא תְּכֵלֶת בַּשּׁוּק, לְשׁוֹנוֹת — פְּסוּלִין, חוּטִין מוּפְסָקִין — כְּשֵׁירִין, לְפִי שֶׁאֵין אָדָם טוֹרֵחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Zeira said to his son Ahava: Go out and teach** this *baraita* **to** the Sages. With regard to **one who finds** fabric dyed **sky blue in the marketplace,** if he finds **strips, they are unfit** for use in ritual fringes; however, if he finds **threads cut** into short strings, **they are fit** for use in ritual fringes **because a person does not exert** himself. Apparently, that is the reason for the *halakha*.


###### Eruvin 96b:14
[Eruvin 96b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:14)

אָמַר רָבָא: וּמִשּׁוּם דְּתָנֵי לַהּ אַהֲבָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי זֵירָא כֵּיפֵי תְּלָא לַהּ?! וְהָתְנַן: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — בִּישָׁנוֹת, אֲבָל בַּחֲדָשׁוֹת — פָּטוּר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: And because Ahava, son of Rabbi Zeira, taught** this *halakha*, **has he hung** ornamental **rings on** that line of reasoning, i.e., does that constitute an absolute proof? The difficulty posed by Rava from the mishna is not resolved by the *baraita*, **as we learned: In what** case **is this statement** that one is permitted to carry phylacteries inside **said?** It is **with regard to old** phylacteries. **However, with regard to new** ones, **he is exempt.** Apparently, there is concern lest one exert himself to fashion an object similar to one used in a mitzva.


###### Eruvin 96b:15
[Eruvin 96b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:15)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: טָרַח וְלָא טָרַח — תַּנָּאֵי הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava said:** The sources are not contradictory, as the question of whether one **exerts** himself **or does not exert** himself **is** the subject of a dispute between ***tanna’im*.** Some hold that one exerts himself as indicated by the mishna with regard to phylacteries, whereas others hold that one does not exert himself as stated with regard to sky blue dye.


###### Eruvin 96b:16
[Eruvin 96b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/96b:16)

דְּתַנְיָא: הַמּוֹצֵא תְּפִילִּין — מַכְנִיסָן זוּג זוּג, אֶחָד הָאִישׁ וְאֶחָד הָאִשָּׁה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it was taught** in the *Tosefta*: **One who finds phylacteries** in a field **brings them in** to the town **pair** by **pair, whether** the finder is **a man or a woman,**