## Eruvin Daf 98a

###### Eruvin 98a:1
[Eruvin 98a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:1)

מַנִּי? רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא, דְּאָמַר: כׇּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת אֵינוֹ עוֹמֵד בִּפְנֵי כִּתְבֵי הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. אֵימָא סֵיפָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ אֵין מְסוּלָּק מִן הָאָרֶץ אֶלָּא מְלֹא הַחוּט גּוֹלְלוֹ אֶצְלוֹ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ בָּאָרֶץ עַצְמָהּ גּוֹלְלוֹ אֶצְלוֹ —

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**who is** the *tanna* of the mishna? **It is Rabbi Shimon, who said: Anything that** is prohibited on Shabbat and its prohibition is not by Torah law, but rather **is due to** a **rabbinic decree** issued to enhance the character of Shabbat as a day of rest does **not stand** as an impediment **before** the rescue of **sacred writings.** But if it is the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, **say the latter clause** of the mishna as follows: **Rabbi Yehuda says: Even if** the scroll **is removed only a needle breadth from the ground, he rolls it** back **to himself;** and **Rabbi Shimon says: Even if** the scroll is **on the ground itself, he rolls it** back **to himself.**


###### Eruvin 98a:2
[Eruvin 98a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:2)

רֵישָׁא וְסֵיפָא רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מְצִיעֲתָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה! אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: אִין, רֵישָׁא וְסֵיפָא רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מְצִיעֲתָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Is it possible that the *tanna* cited in **the first clause** of the mishna is Rabbi Shimon, as claimed above, while it is explicitly stated that **the last clause** represents the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon,** and yet its **middle clause** reflects the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda? Rav Yehuda said: Yes,** that is the correct, albeit unconventional, explanation. **The first and last clauses** are in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon,** while **the middle clause** of the mishna reflects the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Eruvin 98a:3
[Eruvin 98a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:3)

רַבָּה אָמַר: הָכָא בְּאִיסְקוּפָּה הַנִּדְרֶסֶת עָסְקִינַן, וּמִשּׁוּם בִּזְיוֹן כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ שְׁרוֹ רַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said** that the mishna may be understood differently. **Here, we are dealing with a threshold that is trodden upon** by the public, **and due to** the potential **degradation of the sacred writings the Sages permitted** one to violate the rabbinic decree. It would be disgraceful if people were to trample over sacred writings.


###### Eruvin 98a:4
[Eruvin 98a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:4)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: תּוֹךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת — גּוֹלְלוֹ אֶצְלוֹ, חוּץ לְאַרְבַּע — הוֹפְכוֹ עַל הַכְּתָב. וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ בְּאִיסְקוּפָּה נִדְרֶסֶת עָסְקִינַן, מָה לִי תּוֹךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מָה לִי חוּץ לְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye raised an objection to his** explanation: It was taught that if the scroll rolled **within four cubits, he rolls it** back **to himself;** if it rolled **beyond four cubits, he turns it over onto** its **writing. And if you say we are dealing with a threshold that is trodden on** by the public, **what** difference is there **to me** whether it remained **within four cubits** and **what** difference is there **to me** if it rolled **beyond four cubits?** Since the prohibition is a rabbinic decree, not a Torah prohibition, why isn’t one permitted to move the scroll in both cases to prevent the degradation of the sacred writings?


###### Eruvin 98a:5
[Eruvin 98a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:5)

אֶלָּא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: הָכָא בְּאִיסְקוּפָּה כַּרְמְלִית עָסְקִינַן, וּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים עוֹבֶרֶת לְפָנֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Abaye said: Here, we are dealing with a threshold** that is **a *karmelit*,** as the threshold is four handbreadths wide but is less than ten handbreadths high. Furthermore, on one side of the *karmelit* there is a private domain, **and a public domain passes before it.**


###### Eruvin 98a:6
[Eruvin 98a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:6)

תּוֹךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, דְּאִי נָפֵיל וּמַיְיתִי לֵיהּ לָא אָתֵי לִידֵי חִיּוּב חַטָּאת — שָׁרוּ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The reason for the different rulings is as follows: If the scroll rolled **within four cubits,** even **if** the entire scroll **falls** out of the one’s hand **and he brings it** back, **he cannot incur liability** to bring **a sin-offering,** as the prohibition against carrying from a public domain to a *karmelit* is a rabbinic decree. Consequently, **the Sages permitted him** to roll it back to himself, as there is no danger of transgressing a Torah prohibition.


###### Eruvin 98a:7
[Eruvin 98a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:7)

חוּץ לְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, דְּאִי מַיְיתֵי לֵיהּ אָתֵי לִידֵי חִיּוּב חַטָּאת — לָא שָׁרוּ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, if it rolled **beyond four cubits, so that if he brings it** back **he incurs liability** to bring **a sin-offering,** as carrying an object four cubits in the public domain is prohibited by Torah law, **the Sages did not permit him** to roll it back. In this case, if he forgot and carried the scroll instead of rolling it, he would be violating a severe prohibition.


###### Eruvin 98a:8
[Eruvin 98a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:8)

אִי הָכִי, תּוֹךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת נָמֵי נִגְזַר דִּילְמָא מְעַיֵּיל מֵרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לִרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד. וְכִי תֵּימָא כֵּיוָן דְּמַפְסֶקֶת כַּרְמְלִית לֵית לַן בַּהּ, וְהָאָמַר רָבָא: הַמַּעֲבִיר חֵפֶץ מִתְּחִלַּת אַרְבַּע לְסוֹף אַרְבַּע, וְהֶעֱבִירוֹ דֶּרֶךְ עָלָיו — חַיָּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so, let us likewise issue a decree** in the case where the scroll remained **within four cubits, lest he bring** the scroll **in from the public domain to the private domain,** i.e., to his house. **And lest you say: Since a *karmelit* separates** the public and private domains **we have no** problem **with it,** as nothing is directly carried from one domain to the other, **didn’t Rava say: One who carries an object from the beginning of four** cubits **to the end of four** cubits in the public domain, **and he carried it by way of** the airspace **above his head,** he **is liable, even though** the object remained more than ten handbreadths off the ground and passed from the beginning to the end of four cubits by way of an exempt zone? Here, too, one should be liable for carrying the scroll from the public domain to a private domain by way of a *karmelit*.


###### Eruvin 98a:9
[Eruvin 98a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:9)

הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן, בְּאִיסְקוּפָּה אֲרוּכָּה, אַדְּהָכִי וְהָכִי מִידְּכַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **With what are we dealing here?** We are dealing **with an extended threshold.** Consequently, **in the meantime,** while he is carrying the scroll along the length of the threshold, **he will remember** not to bring it into the private domain.


###### Eruvin 98a:10
[Eruvin 98a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:10)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: לְעוֹלָם בְּאִסְקוּפָּה שֶׁאֵינָהּ אֲרוּכָּה, וּסְתָם כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ עַיּוֹנֵי מְעַיֵּין בְּהוּ וּמַנַּח לְהוּ. וְלֵיחוּשׁ דִּילְמָא מְעַיֵּין בְּהוּ בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים וְעָיֵיל לְהוּ בְּהֶדְיָא לִרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead: **Actually,** it is referring **to a threshold that is not extended;** however, **ordinarily one peruses sacred writings and** then **puts them** in their place. Consequently, there is no concern that he might pass directly from the public to the private domain, as he will pause on the threshold to read the scroll. The Gemara asks: According to this explanation too, **let us be concerned lest he** pause to **peruse** the scroll **in the public domain, and** subsequently **carry it directly into the private domain** without pausing in the *karmelit*.


###### Eruvin 98a:11
[Eruvin 98a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:11)

הָא מַנִּי בֶּן עַזַּאי הִיא, דְּאָמַר: מְהַלֵּךְ כְּעוֹמֵד דָּמֵי. וְדִילְמָא זָרֵיק לְהוּ מִזְרָק, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מוֹדֶה בֶּן עַזַּאי בְּזוֹרֵק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: In accordance with **whose** opinion is **this** mishna? **It is** the opinion of **Ben Azzai, who said** that **walking is considered like standing.** Consequently, one who passes through the *karmelit* is considered to have paused and stood there. Therefore, the object was not transferred directly from the public domain to the private domain, as he paused in the *karmelit*. The Gemara asks: **But** what of the concern **lest he throw** the scrolls inside, rather than carry them by hand, **as Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Ben Azzai concedes** that **one who throws** an object from the public domain to a private domain by way of an exempt domain is liable?


###### Eruvin 98a:12
[Eruvin 98a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:12)

אָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר אַהֲבָה: זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת אֵין מְזָרְקִין כִּתְבֵי הַקּוֹדֶשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **Rav Aḥa bar Ahava said: That is to say** that **one does not throw sacred writings,** as this is demeaning to them. Consequently, there is no concern that one might throw the scrolls rather than carry them by hand.


###### Eruvin 98a:13
[Eruvin 98a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:13)

הָיָה קוֹרֵא בְּרֹאשׁ הַגָּג וְכוּ׳. וּמִי שְׁרֵי? וְהָתַנְיָא: כּוֹתְבֵי סְפָרִים תְּפִילִּין וּמְזוּזוֹת לֹא הִתִּירוּ לָהֶן לְהַפֵּךְ יְרִיעָה עַל פָּנֶיהָ, אֶלָּא פּוֹרֵס עָלֶיהָ אֶת הַבֶּגֶד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It was stated in the mishna: If **one was reading on top of the roof,** which is a full-fledged private domain, and the scroll rolled from his hand, as long as the edge of the scroll did not reach ten handbreadths above the public domain, he may roll it back to himself. However, once the scroll reached within ten handbreadths above the public domain, it is prohibited to roll it back. In that case, he should turn it over, so that the writing of the scroll will be facedown and not be exposed and degraded. The Gemara asks: **And is it permitted** to do so? **Wasn’t it taught** in a *baraita* that with regard to **writers of scrolls, phylacteries, and *mezuzot*** who interrupt their work, the Sages **did not permit them to turn the sheet** of parchment **facedown** lest it become soiled? **Rather, one spreads a cloth over it** in a respectful manner.


###### Eruvin 98a:14
[Eruvin 98a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:14)

הָתָם אֶפְשָׁר, הָכָא לָא אֶפְשָׁר, וְאִי לָא אָפֵיךְ אִיכָּא בִּזְיוֹן כִּתְבֵי הַקּוֹדֶשׁ טְפֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There,** with regard to scribes, **it is possible** to cover the parchment respectfully; **here,** it **is not possible** to do so. **And if he does not turn** the scroll **over, it will be more degrading to the sacred writings.** Consequently, although this is not an ideal solution, it is preferable to turn it over rather than leave the scroll exposed.


###### Eruvin 98a:15
[Eruvin 98a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:15)

הוֹפְכוֹ עַל הַכְּתָב? וְהָא לָא נָח! [אָמַר רָבָא:] בְּכוֹתֶל מְשׁוּפָּע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna states: Once the scroll has reached within ten handbreadths above the public domain, it is prohibited to roll it back to oneself, and **one turns it over onto the writing.** The Gemara asks: **But** why is this prohibited? Since the scroll **did not** come to **rest** in the public domain, rolling it back to oneself should not be prohibited. **Rava said:** This teaching is referring **to an inclined wall.** Although the scroll did not reach the ground, it came to rest within the confines of the public domain.


###### Eruvin 98a:16
[Eruvin 98a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:16)

[אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי:] בְּמַאי אוֹקֵימְתָּא לְמַתְנִיתִין? בְּכוֹתֶל מְשׁוּפָּע, אֵימָא סֵיפָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ אֵינוֹ מְסוּלָּק מִן הָאָרֶץ אֶלָּא מְלֹא הַחוּט — גּוֹלְלוֹ אֶצְלוֹ, וְהָא נָח לֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to him: In what** manner **did you establish** that **the mishna** is referring **to** the case of **an inclined wall? Say the latter clause** of the mishna as follows: **Rabbi Yehuda says: Even** if the scroll **is removed only a needle breadth from the ground, he rolls it** back **to himself. But didn’t** the scroll come to **rest** in the public domain? It shouldn’t matter whether or not the scroll is in contact with the ground.


###### Eruvin 98a:17
[Eruvin 98a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/98a:17)

חַסּוֹרֵי מִיחַסְּרָא, וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — בְּכוֹתֶל מְשׁוּפָּע, אֲבָל

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The mishna **is incomplete and is teaching the following: In what** case **is this statement said?** It is said **in** the case of **an inclined wall. However,**