More Discussions for this daf
1. Last section of 19b 2. Ongoing Geulah From Mitzrayim
DAF DISCUSSIONS - ERUVIN 19

Ben Maddow asks:

The last Ibaya on 19b asks: Does a chitas hakanim work as a diumad.

The gemara attempts to prove from a braisah which talks about 3 things: an ilan, a gader, and a chitzas hakanim. Presumably the chitzas hakanim being spoken of is the same as we are trying to talk about.

The gemara defends that perhaps the chitzas hakanim of the braisah is where it is a gudrisa--all of them are growing out of a common stump.

The offense challenge the defense, that if so, it would be the same case as ilan!

The defenders defend that either way, two of the cases of the braisah must be the same, since if you read it like the offense that chitzas hakanim is sticks less than 3 tefachim apart, then it will be the same case as gader! So either there are two sorts of gaders or two sorts of ilanos.

So the defenders reading of the braisah then is there are 3 cases: ilan, gader, and chitzas hakanim. Ilan is a tree. Chitzas hakanim is a gudrisah. And gader is....?

I don't get it. Gader is sticks less than 3 tefachim apart. I know it is, because the defenders insist that if chitzas hakanim is that, then it will be the same case as gader. So how is there not a proof from the braisah?

Ben Maddow, Brooklyn, NY

The Kollel replies:

1. The defenders' reading of the Beraisa is not that there are three cases. Instead, there are really only two cases. There is a Gader and an Ilan. However, there are two kinds of Ilan according to the defense: (a) a proper tree where the entire trunk is solid, (b) a Gudrisa, which are wooden rods which are only together very close to the ground. Concerning (a), one can say that it theoretically could be split it into two, and two pillars carved out which would be considered as a Diyumad (as Rashi writes in DH Trei), but the Chidush of the Beraisa is that even though one could not say concerning (b) that it could be split it and carved out, nevertheless this is sufficient to be considered a Diyumad, as Rashi writes.

2. In short, according to the defense, Ilan and Chitzas ha'Kanim are two kinds of trees, while Gader is a stone fence.

3. Even though the defenders insist that if Chitzas ha'Kanim refers to sticks less than three Tefachim apart then it would be the same as Gader, nevertheless the offense can refute this argument and say that there are two kinds of Gader. The first kind is a stone wall, and the second kind is the sticks which are only "Sheti" (vertical) and not horizontal. The chidush of the Beraisa is that even a Gader of Sheti alone is considered a Gader (see Ritva, end of 19b).

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom