Quoting%20commentary for Eruvin 3:1
בַּכֹּל מְעָרְבִין וּמִשְׁתַּתְּפִים, חוּץ מִן הַמַּיִם וּמִן הַמֶּלַח. וְהַכֹּל נִקָּח בְּכֶסֶף מַעֲשֵׂר, חוּץ מִן הַמַּיִם וּמִן הַמֶּלַח. הַנּוֹדֵר מִן הַמָּזוֹן, מֻתָּר בְּמַיִם וּבְמֶלַח. מְעָרְבִין לְנָזִיר בְּיַיִן וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵל בִּתְרוּמָה. סוּמְכוֹס אוֹמֵר, בְּחֻלִּין. וּלְכֹהֵן בְּבֵית הַפְּרָס. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיָּכוֹל לֵילֵךְ לָחוֹץ וְלֶאֱכֹל:
An eruv and a partnership [in a mavui (see 1:1)] is made with all (foods), except with water and salt. [We are speaking here of eruvin of tchumin (Sabbath bounds); for eruvin of chatzeroth (courtyards) are made only with bread. "With all" in our Mishnah is non-categorical, as stated in the gemara: "We do not learn (rules) from generalizations, even those qualified by 'except.'" For here we learn "An eruv is made with all (foods), except with water and salt," even though we also do not make an eruv with morils and truffles, they, too, not being foods, like water and salt.] And all (foods) may be bought with ma'aser (sheni) money, [it being written (Deuteronomy 14:26): "And you shall give the money for all that your soul desires"], except water and salt, [this not being "fruit of a fruit"]. If one bevows himself from "mazon," he is permitted water and salt. [Not that he says: "Let mazon be forbidden to me," for the only foods that are called "mazon" are the five species that "sustain and support" (wheat, barley, rye, oats, and spelt); rather, he says: "I bevow myself of everything that sustains (zan)" — and all foods sustain and sate for a while except water and salt.] An eruv may be made for a Nazirite with wine, [for even though it is forbidden to him, it is permitted to others], and (an eruv may be made) for an Israelite with terumah, [for it is permitted to Cohanim.] Somchos says: (An eruv may be made for an Israelite, only) with chullin (non-consecrated food), [for something permitted to him is required. And Somchos does not differ vis-à-vis (an eruv of) wine for a Nazirite, for a Nazirite can be absolved of his vow, and the wine be permitted to him on that Shabbath. But terumah cannot be rendered permissible to an Israelite. For even if he were "absolved" of his terumah-taking, so that it is as if it were never taken, it returns to its state of tevel, and may not be eaten until a different terumah is taken. But terumah may not be taken on Shabbath, even at twilight; therefore, it cannot be permitted to him. The halachah is not in accordance with Somchos.] And (an eruv may be made) for a Cohein in a beth hapras. [This is anonymous, not stated by Somchos. Beth hapras is a field in which a grave has been plowed up. A Cohein may enter there when he "blows" as he walks, taking care not to touch a bone the size of a barley-corn. He is, therefore, permitted to place his eruv there; for he can go to the place where he placed his eruv, and he and his eruv be in the same spot.] R. Yehudah says: (An eruv may be made for him) even in a cemetery, for he can make a partition and eat. [He can make a partition between himself and the grave, so that he not "tent" over it, as by entering in a closed wagon, in which instance it is permitted to him. The gemara states that the rabbis differ with R. Yehudah even vis-à-vis an Israelite, ruling that it is forbidden to place an eruv in a cemetery, "Cohein" being stated only to apprise us of the "power" of R. Yehudah, that it is permitted even with a Cohein. The rationale of their difference: R. Yehudah holds that even though it is forbidden to derive benefit from a cemetery, it is permitted to place an eruv there, a Sabbath-bound eruv being made only for the sake of a mitzvah, and mitzvoth not having been given for "benefit." And even though the eruv is "guarded" there after he acquires (halachic habitation), this being effected at twilight; and the eruv remains after he has performed the mitzvah, the entire Shabbath — R. Yehudah holds that one is not concerned if his eruv is lost or stolen after he acquires (halachic habitation). And the rabbis hold that one is concerned, desiring that it not be stolen. Therefore, with the eruv being "guarded" in the cemetery the entire Shabbath after he has acquired (habitation) at twilight and his mitzvah having been completed, he is found to be deriving benefit from graves, something which is forbidden. Therefore, one may not place an eruv in a cemetery. The halachah is in accordance with the sages.]
Explore quoting%20commentary for Eruvin 3:1. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.