Eiruvin 79a, b

Another challenging daf, but with a few perks: some of the daf was easier to contextualize, and it ends with some fun stories about the rabbis of Pumbadita.

79a begins with an interesting argument regarding the laws of impurity and the laws of Shabbat.  It seems that the rabbis might also become confused with regard to the application these laws.  They are discussing the legal differences between a house filled with hay or dirt where the intention is to remove them from the house, and a ditch filled with hay/dirt where the intention is to permanently fill the ditch.  One of their considerations is the halacha telling us that some things are to be set-aside and not moved over Shabbat.  That halacha does not apply to things that are never intended to be moved - whether or not it is Shabbat.  This particular passage is challenging to follow for a layperson like myself.

The rabbis move from this argument into a discussion regarding ditches.  If a board is placed over the width of a ditch between two courtyards, it is considered an entranceway and the courtyards require only one eiruv.  If a board is placed lengthwise along the ditch, creating a ditch of less than four handbreadths, then the two courtyards are considered connected according to the law of lavud - again, only one eiruv is required.  In these paragraphs, it seems more clear than usual that the rabbis are looking toward creating a closer community and less work for Jews of that time.

The rabbis speak about connecting balconies in a similar way. A new Mishna tells us about haystacks between courtyards that are over 10 handbreadths high and thus act as partitions, requiring two eiruvin. When people remove hay for feeding animals, lowering the height of the eiruv, they can create a single courtyard again.  But the rules around this concern types of work on Shabbat, the needs of animals,  and what is to be set-aside on Shabbat.

79b shares a debate about the height of a partition made of hay inside a house.  This leaves me to wonder whether someone created a pile of hay inside their home to create a partition.  Perhaps between the area for people and that designed for animals?  But a wall of hay inside a home... certainly not concocted by the person responsible for cleaning the floors.

The daf continues with a conversation about how to establish an eiruv for an alleyway shared by many.  The rabbis suggest that a barrel (or another vessel) filled with food or wine is placed in a conspicuous manner, where the owner or his (sic) designate says, "This is for all the residents of the alleyway."  They are clear that only people who are legally able adults (and according to Rav Shimshon of Raevs, those not financially dependent on the 'master') can be the 'master's' designates in this process.

The rabbis have a short conversation about one who might "lock his door (and/or) renounce his rights" in favour of a neighbour regarding establishing an eiruv and carrying.  Obviously these two acts held significant meaning in ancient times.

Finally, we are told about the elders of Pembadita.  They were the ones who told us that the barrel/eiruv should be placed above other barrels to clearly mark the merging of alleyways and that act of acquisition.  So we learn that things given to others are lifted to mark the acquisition, just as in the bedeken part of a Jewish wedding ceremony.  

Secondly, the elders of Pembadita teach us that one who recites kiddush over wine on Shabbat or Festivals must drink "a mouthful of wine" (or a quarter of a log of wine) to fulfill the mitzvah of kiddush.  They move on to speak about when one is allowed to light a fire on Shabbat: for a woman in childbirth, in the winter months when people catch cold, and possibly even other times.  Finally, the elders of Pembadita discuss which trees are designed for asheira, or idolatry.

I love that women in labour are protected, though I read earlier in masechet Shabbat that women in labour are only warmed by a fire lit on Shabbat in certain circumstances.  Nevertheless, the elders of Pembadita did not quibble about this one.  Women in labour are worthy breaking the laws of Shabbat... or, perhaps, at least their babies are worthy of this 'luxury'.

So often, protecting the rights and needs of women protects the rights and needs of an entire community.  Treat a woman in labour well and her baby has a much better chance of survival.  Treat a woman well in relationships and there is a greater likelihood of her happiness and thus the happiness of those around her.  Treat a woman with respect and she is more likely to bring a strong sense of self, strength, purpose and success to her family and her community.  But treat a woman badly... the webs holding together our societies unravel.