Talmud for Nedarim 5:1

הַשֻּׁתָּפִין שֶׁנָּדְרוּ הֲנָאָה זֶה מִזֶּה, אֲסוּרִין לִכָּנֵס לֶחָצֵר. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, זֶה נִכְנָס לְתוֹךְ שֶׁלּוֹ וְזֶה נִכְנָס לְתוֹךְ שֶׁלּוֹ. וּשְׁנֵיהֶם אֲסוּרִים לְהַעֲמִיד שָׁם רֵחַיִם וְתַנּוּר וּלְגַדֵּל תַּרְנְגוֹלִים. הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶם מֻדָּר הֲנָאָה מֵחֲבֵרוֹ, לֹא יִכָּנֵס לֶחָצֵר. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, יָכוֹל הוּא לוֹמַר לוֹ, לְתוֹךְ שֶׁלִּי אֲנִי נִכְנָס וְאֵינִי נִכְנָס לְתוֹךְ שֶׁלָּךְ. וְכוֹפִין אֶת הַנּוֹדֵר לִמְכֹּר אֶת חֶלְקוֹ:

Partners who bevowed benefit from each other are forbidden to enter the courtyard. R. Eliezer b. Yaakov says: This one enters his and that one enter his. [Partners, each of whom has a house in a courtyard, and both are partners in the court before the houses, where there is a law of division in the courtyard, i.e., when for each house there are four cubits in the courtyard in front of the house and there remain in the courtyard an additional four cubits for each one — in such an instance all agree that both are forbidden to enter the courtyard until they divide it, the law of division obtaining. R. Eliezer and the rabbis differ only with respect to a courtyard where the law of division does not obtain, the rabbis holding that each one enters his neighbor's (property), and R. Eliezer b. Yaakov holding that there is breirah (retroactive identification), and each one enters his own.] And both are forbidden to place a mill and an oven there or to raise chickens there. [R. Eliezer b. Yaakov concedes in all of these instances that partners can stop each other, it not being possible to permit this on grounds of breirah. For since it is possible for him to stop him and he does not do so, he is found to benefit him.] If one of them had bevowed benefit from his neighbor, he may not enter the courtyard. R. Eliezer b. Yaakov says: He may say to him: "I am entering what is mine, and I am not entering what is yours." And the bevower is compelled to sell his portion. [For we fear that since he sees his neighbor entering, he might forget and, likewise, enter. But when both are forbidden, this is not to be feared. And it is only when one vowed of himself not to benefit from his neighbor that we compel him to sell his portion. But if his neighbor bevowed him not to benefit from him, he is anuss ("forced"), and he is not compelled to sell, for what could he do? If this were permitted, every partner would bevow the other not to benefit from him in order to compel him to sell him his portion!]

Jerusalem Talmud Bava Batra

^56*The entire paragraph is from Nedarim 5:1, Notes 16–20. The courtyard is there for entering and leaving the houses. Any other use is possible only if it does not disturb other inhabitants of the courtyard. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Banaiah. Everything the co-owners can prevent one another from doing in the courtyard except laundering because of the honor of the daughters of Israel⁵⁷Babli 57b.. Rebbi Mattaniah said, this is at a place where women do the laundering, but not at a place where men do the laundering. And what was said, except laundering because of the honor of the daughters of Israel, only that in his own four cubits he may prevent it. And what was said, everything the co-owners can prevent one another from doing in the courtyard, in the entire courtyard except in the other person’s own four cubits where he cannot prevent him. But if the place was at an incline, even in the other person’s own four cubits he can prevent him, since he may tell him: you are pouring out in your domain but it flows down into mine.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Bava Kamma

HALAKHAH: “If somebody split [wood] in a private domain,” etc. ¹¹²The entire paragraph is copied in Makkot 2:4. The text bracketed here is an addition by the corrector, probably from Makkot, recognizable by his standard Babli spelling. The same topic is discussed in the Babli, 32b/33a. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, if he was splitting wood in his courtyard when a worker entered to claim¹¹³In Makkot: “To collect”. In any case, the person entering did not trespass. his wages, and a splinter ricocheted and damaged him, he is liable. If he died he does not go into exile¹¹⁴The responsibility of the person splitting wood in his own backyard is in civil, not in criminal law. The text in Makkot adds: “Because it is not as in a forest,” referring to Deut. 19:5 which describes the circumstances under which the homicide has to dwell in a city of refuge. The Babli, 33a, quotes the end of the same verse, describing how the blade of an ax “finds his neighbor and he dies”, to exclude one who walks into the path of danger (cf. Sifry Deut. 183).. But did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state, “he is not liable”? They do not disagree. What Rebbi Yose said, if he had seen him, but what Rebbi Ḥiyya said, if he had not seen him. If he had not seen him, once he said to him: enter, {should he not be liable? But did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state, “he is not liable”? Since he told him: enter, he has to take precautions¹¹⁵In Tosephta 6:27 it is stated explicitly that the worker, who has the right to go and collect his wages, enters on his own responsibility unless invited in, at which moment the responsibility shifts to his employer.. Some want to say, since he told him to enter it} becomes like the courtyard of partners, about which Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Yannai¹¹⁶Nedarim 5:1, Notes 22–23: Partners acquire from one another in a courtyard and are mutually liable for damages. But did not Rav say: If he filled the entire public domain^6,Babli 27b. If one does not stop traffic, one is permitted to put down his load in the public domain.¹⁰⁴The Mishnah only applies to a narrow path; on a wide road the second person is required not to walk directly behind the one carrying a dangerous load.? And did this fill the entire public domain? They said, since he¹¹⁷The worker, looking for his employer to collect his wages. walks in the entire courtyard, it is as if he had filled the entire courtyard.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Full Chapter Next Verse