Mishnah
Mishnah

Talmud for Eruvin 9:2

גַּג גָּדוֹל סָמוּךְ לְקָטָן, הַגָּדוֹל מֻתָּר וְהַקָּטָן אָסוּר. חָצֵר גְּדוֹלָה שֶׁנִּפְרְצָה לִקְטַנָּה, גְּדוֹלָה מֻתֶּרֶת, וּקְטַנָּה אֲסוּרָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כְפִתְחָהּ שֶׁל גְּדוֹלָה. חָצֵר שֶׁנִּפְרְצָה לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, הַמַּכְנִיס מִתּוֹכָהּ לִרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד, אוֹ מֵרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד לְתוֹכָהּ, חַיָּב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, מִתּוֹכָהּ לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, אוֹ מֵרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְתוֹכָהּ, פָּטוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כְּכַרְמְלִית:

A large roof adjoining a small one — the large is permitted [i.e., It is permitted to bring vessels to it from the house below, and those of the small roof do not forbid it, for vis-à-vis the large roof, the breach in the small roof is (perceived as) an entrance, and it (the large roof) is permitted by reason of the wings jutting out a little on either side as a railing around the roofs, and it is considered an enclosure. (This, when the breach is not larger than ten cubits.)], but the small is forbidden [i.e., It is forbidden to bring vessels to it from the house below, the men of the large roof forbidding it, for it (the small roof) is "breached onto it" entirely.] A large courtyard breached onto a small one — the large is permitted, [by reason of the wings remaining on either side, causing the breach to be perceived as an entrance], and the small is forbidden, [being entirely breached. This, only if it were breached before Shabbath, but if it were breached on Shabbath, even the small one is permitted. For since it was permitted for part of Shabbath, before it was breached, it is permitted for all of Shabbath.] A courtyard breached into the public domain [i.e., a courtyard whose wall facing the public domain fell entirely or (were breached) by more than ten cubits] — if one carries from it to a private domain or from a private domain to it, he is liable, [for it is like a public domain.] These are the words of R. Eliezer. The sages say: (If he carries) from it to the public domain or from the public domain to it, he is not liable, [but it is forbidden to do so], for it is [not a public domain, but] like a karmelith. [The halachah is in accordance with the sages.]

Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot

Rebbi Isaac ben Tevele in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: The reason of Rebbi Jehudah: “112Deut. 25:6. The verse connects the birth of a first-born with the inheritance of the dead brother. The first-born whom she will bear shall be”; He compared it to a first-born. Since the first-born does not inherit during his father’s lifetime, so this one does not inherit during his father’s lifetime. But since the first-born inherits after his father’s death, does this one inherit after his father’s death113Since the first-born inherits an extra portion from the estate, does the levir inherit the separate inheritance of his wife’s first husband separately?? Rebbi Ze‘ira said, since the first-born does not inherit when it was time to inherit, so this one does not inherit when it was time to inherit114The separatee inheritance of the first-born is restricted (Deut. 21:17) to “all that is found of his property.” This is interpreted as excluding claims that are not yet collected; cf., e. g., Babli Baba batra 55a. Since the inheritance of the dead brother is under his wife’s lien for her ketubah, it is not considered as “found of his property”.. Afterwards he cannot inherit. Rebbi Abba bar Cahana, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, practice follows Rebbi Judah. Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia, practice follows Rebbi Judah. Rebbi Joḥanan said, many times I sat before Rebbi Hoshaia and never heard that from him. He said to him, does nobody exist who heard something his partner did not hear115The Babli, 40a, strongly disagrees since practice follows the anonymous majority. This is the position of R. Joḥanan’s teacher R. Yannai.?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse