Commento su 'Eruvin 7:13

חלון. בתוך י' – that it is a part of it and even a minimum amount within ten [handbreadths] nearest the ground.

Introduction The first five mishnayot of this chapter deal with two courtyards that are adjacent to one another and whether or not they may make a joint eruv.

מערבין שנים – two Eruvin, these to themselves and those to themselves and they are prohibited one with the other. .

If a window between two courtyards was four handbreadths by four handbreadths, and was within ten handbreadths [from the ground], the tenants prepare two eruvin or, if they want, they may prepare one. If there is a window which is four by four handbreadths and is less than ten handbreadths from the ground, then this window has the potential but not the necessity to join the two courtyards into one common domain. If the residents of the two courtyards make one joint eruv, then they may both carry in both courtyards, because both courtyards are in essence one. If they set up separate eruvin, the residents may carry only in their own courtyards.

ואם רצו מערבין א' – one Eruv that they will their Eruv in the other one and make their Eruv with them and it will be one/united [for both].

If [the size of the window was] less than four handbreadths by four handbreadths or higher than ten handbreadths from the ground, they may prepare two eruvin but not one. However, if the window was smaller than four by four handbreadths, or higher, then it doesn’t join the two courtyards and each can only set up their own eruv. The reason why the window does not join the two courtyards if it is set higher is that in such a case there is a full ten handbreadth wall separating the two. Such a wall is sufficient to count as a full separation. Furthermore, with a window this high it will be difficult to see from one courtyard into the other, helping separate their identities.

פחות מד' – it is not an opening/door and it is not appropriate to pass from this one to that one, and above ten [handbreadths] it is not satisfactory; therefore, we don’t make one Eruv, and specifically in a courtyard that is not its source, but in the original house, even if it is above ten [handbreadths] we make one Eruv in the manner to place benches and chests around the house and it is usage is satisfactory.

כותל שבין שתי חצירות – this that it (i.e., the Tanna of the Mishnah) took [the words] "רחב ד'"/”that it was wide four handbreadths” – is not because it needs to be four handbreadths width to be a closing/closure, for a partition with a width of any amount is a closure/closing. But rather, because it was necessary to teach the closing [segment], “if there were [at its top] produce, these can ascend from here, and eat [them] as long as they don’t bring it down below, which is considered a domain of its own, and for this law, it was necessary that it would be wide four [handbreadths], for less than four [handbreadths] is an exempt domain (i.e., an area of less than four handbreadths by four handbreadths or a height differential of at least three handbreadths – as one may carry objects to or from this exempt domain, but one may not transfer objects through it from of those domains to another), ad both of them (the people on the two sides) can lower it downwards.

Introduction This mishnah deals with what constitutes a wall between two courtyards.

ובלבד שלא יורידו למטה – to the inhabitants in the houses, but in the courtyard, it is permitted.

If a wall between two courtyards was ten handbreadths high and four handbreadths thick, two eruvin must be prepared, but not one. In order for the wall to count as a full partition between the two courtyards, it needs to be ten handbreadths high. Such a wall fully separates the two, such that each must make their own eruv. According to the Yerushalmi, although the mishnah says that the wall must be four handbreadths thick, even a wall less thick still counts as a full partition. The mishnah mentions a thickness of four handbreadths because of clause 2, which says that they may not bring the fruit down. According to the Yerushalmi, if the wall is less than four handbreadths wide it is not its own domain, and one can take produce down from there.

יותר מכאן – this is a breach, and all of it would be like one courtyard. But if he made an Eruv each one for itself, it would be as if they divide their Eruv and prohibit those [on one side from carrying to] those [on the other side].

If there was produce on top of it, the [residents] from this side may climb up and eat and those from this side may climb up and eat, provided they do not bring it down. The top of a ten handbreadth high, four handbreadth wide wall is a domain unto itself, and therefore, one cannot take something down from there to another domain. However, people from either side may climb up and eat the produce while sitting on top of the wall.

If the wall was breached a breach of ten cubits, the residents prepare two eruvin or, if they prefer, they prepare one eruv, because it is like a doorway. A breach of less than ten cubits can count as a doorway, and therefore, the residents of the two courtyards may make either separate eruvin, or one eruv for both courtyards. The advantage to making two different eruvin is that if one of those from one courtyard does not participate in the eruv, those of the other courtyard will still be able to carry within their own courtyard. The advantage to making one eruv is that it is obviously easier (and slightly cheaper) to set up one eruv than two.

If the breach was bigger, only one eruv and not two may be prepared. If the breach in the wall is greater than ten cubits the breach cannot be considered a doorway and we must consider the two courtyards to be one. This would mean that if one person from either courtyard does not participate, none of the residents of either courtyard may carry.

חריץ – it is long and interrupts on the surface of the entire courtyard.

Introduction Today’s mishnah is about a ditch that separates two courtyards. The rules concerning the ditch are very similar to the rules about the wall which we learned yesterday.

ורחב ד' – for less than this, it is easy to walk from border to border/rim to rim.

If a ditch between two courtyards was ten handbreadths deep and four handbreadths wide, they may make two eruvin but not one, even if it was full of stubble or straw. Just as a ten handbreadth high, four handbreadth wide wall is sufficiently large to separate the two courtyards, so too acts a ditch ten handbreadths deep and four handbreadths wide. This is true even if the ditch is full of straw or stubble. These do not count as filling up the ditch because people don’t generally leave them there for good. Rather they may store the straw or stubble in the ditch for a while until they need them later on. In other words, it’s still a ditch. Since these are two separate courtyards, each one must have its own eruv.

ואפילו מלא תבן וקש – it is not a closure, for it does not abolish/suspend for him [going] to there for he will ultimately take it [to bring to his animals].

If it was full of earth or gravel, only one eruv may be prepared, but not two. In contrast, usually when people fill a ditch with earth or gravel, it is because they no longer want the ditch. They don’t usually “store” their dirt there, only to get it back later. Once filled with earth or gravel, the ditch is no longer there. Therefore, the two courtyards are actually only one and only one eruv may be prepared.

נתן עליו נסר – from one rim/border [of the trench] to the other, like a kind of bridge, which is like an opening.

Introduction This mishnah continues to deal with a ditch separating two courtyards.

שתי גזוזטראות – as a kind of protruding ceiling/roofing from the private domain on the public domain, and he places a plank that is four [handbreadths] wide from one side to the other, and it is also an opening.

If he placed over it a board four handbreadths wide, and so also where two balconies are opposite one another, the residents may prepare two eruvin or, if they prefer, only one. [If the board] was less wide two eruvs may be prepared, but not one. If someone “bridges” the ditch with a board four handbreadths wide, the two courtyards can now be treated as one. The board is to the ditch like the opening was to the wall both serve as passages from one courtyard to the other. The second clause of the mishnah states the opposite if the board was less than four handbreadths wide, then it does not serve as a passage because people would be hesitant about crossing. In such a case each courtyard must set up its own eruv. The mention of the two balconies is abbreviated here and must be fleshed out. The two balconies can join two courtyards if there is a four handbreadth wide board which bridges the two. In such a case they may make either two separate eruvin or one for both. If there is no such board, then they must make separate eruvin.

פחות מכאן – that if the plank is not four [handbreadths] wide, a person will fear to pass upon it and its use won’t be pleasant [and hence requiring two Eruvin – one for each side].

מתבן – a heap of straw, and it interrupts on the surface of the entire width of the courtyards.

Introduction This mishnah discusses a heap of straw that divides two courtyards.

אלו מאכילין – they place their cattle to eat from the straw, and we don’t suspect that perhaps the straw will be come less than ten [handbreadths] and that it would be one domain and they would be mutually prohibited [from eating] and would carry in the courtyard and not be aware of it, for this we do not suspect for even whether it would decrease or not, the minority is over the surface of ten cubits and more does not prohibit it, for ten cubits are an opening, and the cattle do not lessen it all that much in its eating [on one Sabbath].

If a heap of straw between two courtyards yards was ten handbreadths high, they make two eruvin but not one. Although we learned above in mishnah three that straw that was used to fill a ditch is not significant and that the ditch remains a partition between the two courtyards, here we learn that a heap of straw itself can serve as such a partition. This is because people sometimes do use heaps of straw in order to divide areas.

נתמעט התבן מי' טפחים – over the surface of the entire length of the courtyard or amidst the ten cubits [and more].

These may feed [their cattle] from this side and these may feed from the other side. Just as it was permitted to eat the produce on top of the wall, so too cattle-owners on each side can allow their cattle to graze from either side of the straw heap.

מערבין אחד – if it decreased on the weekday before [the onset of] Shabbat.

If the height of the straw heap was reduced to less than ten handbreadths, one eruv may be prepared but not two. If the heap of straw became less than ten handbreadths high, it ceases to serve as a partition, and then both courtyards must share an eruv.

מניח את החבית – [he sets down the jar] of his own [food, wine, etc.] if he wishes, and then needs to grant possession/entitles, for whereas it if is theirs, he doesn’t need to grant possession/entitle [to them].

Introduction Our mishnah discusses how one sets up an “alley partnership”, which in Hebrew is called a “shittuf mavoi”. This type of eruv (common meal) allows people from different courtyards to carry within the alley which leads from the courtyards out to the public domain. There are a few differences between courtyard eruvin and alley partnerships. A courtyard eruv must consist of bread, whereas any food will suffice for an alley partnership. Secondly, all members of the courtyard must participate in the eruv, whereas one person who lives off the alley can confer ownership of some food to all who live in the alley and thereby render it effective as a commonly owned meal without the financial contribution of others.

ומזכה להם ע"י בנו ובתן – he says to them: “Accept this jar and take possession of it in the name of all the members of the alleyway.” And the person who takes possession lifts up the Eruv with his hand a handbreadth from the ground, for wherever that he places it in his domain, there would be no taking of possession.

How does one make an “alley partnership”? One [of the residents] places a jar and declares, “Behold, this belongs to all the residents of the alley”, and he confers possession upon [the other residents] through his adult son or daughter, through his Hebrew servant or maidservant or through his wife. But he may not confer possession through his minor son or daughter or through his Canaanite slave or female slave, because their hand is as his hand. How does one make an “alley partnership”? One [of the residents] places a jar and declares, “Behold, this belongs to all the residents of the alley”, and he confers possession upon [the other residents] through his adult son or daughter, through his Hebrew servant or maidservant or through his wife. But he may not confer possession through his minor son or daughter or through his Canaanite slave or female slave, because their hand is as his hand. The mishnah describes two stages ways in setting up an alley partnership. The first stage is to take a jar of any type of food and to declare that he confers joint ownership of the food on all of the residents of the alley. The announcement serves to let everyone know what he is doing so that they will know that they can carry in the alley. He then takes this jar of food and gives it to another person who will accept it on behalf of all of the residents of the alley. However, in order for this transfer to be valid the other person must be independent of the giver. A man’s adult children, wife and Hebrew servants are all independent of him and therefore he may transfer through them ownership of the food to the other people in the alley. This is true even if he provides food and shelter for these people. The mishnah need not state that he could confer ownership through other people to whom he is not related. However, he may not transfer ownership through his non-Jewish (called Canaanite) slaves since he owns them. When he gives them something it does not leave his possession since they too are in his possession.

שידן כידו – this is not taking of possession [since the minor child or the Canaanite slave or maidservant are considered as property of the parent/master].

נתמעט האוכל – from its measurement that is explained further in our Mishnah (i.e., in Mishnah 8).

Introduction This mishnah is a continuation of yesterday’s mishnah which discussed how one sets up an alley partnership.

מוסיף ומזכה – if he comes to add from his own [food or wine], even from a different species [of food] from the first partnership/shared species, he adds and causes them to take possess and he doesn’t need to inform them (i.e., the other participants in the partnership alleyway), for since there remains a bit from the first species, it doesn’t appear like it an Eruv was made at the outset, but if he puts in from the partnership/shared species [of food], even if it was completely finished, he brings from the same species and he doesn’t need to inform them.

If the food was reduced, he must add to it and confer possession [upon the other residents] but he need not inform them. In tomorrow’s mishnah we will learn that there is a minimum amount of food that is necessary for the eruv to be valid. If the amount of food is reduced (before Shabbat begins) he (or another one of the residents) must add to it to make it reach the minimum measure. He must confer ownership of this extra food upon the other residents of the alley, in the same way that he did when he set up the eruv to begin with. However, since he already announced that he was setting up an alley partnership, and thereby let all of the residents know that he was including them, he need not inform them that he is adding to the food.

נתוספו עליהם דיורים מוסיף ומזכה וצריך להודיע – and especially at the time when the courtyard has two openings for two alleyways, for when they make an Eruv with the people of this alleyway, it is forbidden to use another alleyway, therefore it is necessary to inform them, for perhaps it is not satisfactory for them to acquire in this direction and to effect a possession in the direction that is opposite it, but if it lacks an opening other than to this alleyway that they have participated/shared in from the outset, there is no need to inform, because you may obtain a privilege in behalf of a person in his absence, but you cannot act in his behalf to his disadvantage (see the conclusion of Tractate Eruvin, Chapter 7, Mishnah 11, where this phrase is used).

If the number of residents has increased, he must add food and confer possession [upon them], and he must inform them. As we will learn tomorrow, the size of the eruv is somewhat related to the number of residents in the alley. If between when he set up the eruv and the beginning of Shabbat the number of residents increased (this is admittedly unlikely) he might have to increase the food in the eruv. When doing this he must again confer possession upon them and in this case he must inform them of what he is doing, because some of the residents were not there when he made his original announcement.

מרובין – eighteen people or more.

Introduction This mishnah introduces how much food must be set aside for both courtyard eruvin and alley partnership.

מועטין – less than eighteen [people].

What is the quantity required?
When the residents are many there should be food sufficient for two meals for all of them; According to the Talmud, “many” means that there are more than 18 residents in the courtyard or alley. In such a case they need leave enough food for two meals (this will be more fully explained in 8:2). Even if there are a thousand residents, two meals is sufficient to count as an eruv for all of them.

מזון שתי סעודות – which are eighteen dried figs.

And when they are few there should be food of the size of a dried fig for each one. If there are fewer residents, then there has to be food the size of a dried fig for each one. If “fewer residents” means that there are less than 18 residents, it means that there the eruv “18 dried figs”. According to the Talmud, two meals must be more than 18 dried figs meaning the size of the eruv for courtyards with many residents will always be greater than that for few residents.

להוצאת שבת – the quantity of removal on Shabbat. For the person who removes food on Shabbat is not liable with less than the equivalent of a dried fig (see Tractate Shabbat, Chapter 7, Mishnah 4).

בשירי העירוב – when it diminished from its quantity.

Introduction The first part of this mishnah is a continuation of yesterday’s mishnah. The second part explains why the rabbis instituted courtyard eruvin in the first place.

ולא אמרו אלא לערב בחצרות – after they made a partnership in an alleyway, but rather, so that the law of the joining of courtyards not be forgotten by children that do not know that they made a partnership in an alleyway, therefore, we are lenient with it. But even though that the reason that they make an Eruv in the joining of courtyards after they had made a partnership in an alleyway is in order that the law of Eruv would not be forgotten from the children, nevertheless, the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi, concerning what is added on [later] to the Eruv that it is not [part of the Eruv], we are lenient with it so much.

Rabbi Yose says: When does this apply? To the beginnings of the eruv but in the case of the remnants of an eruv even the smallest quantity of food is sufficient, According to Rabbi Yose, the minimum measurement for the eruv provided in yesterday’s mishnah applies only to when the eruv is set up before Shabbat. When one sets up an eruv, it must contain a minimum amount of food. If the eruv is lessened during Shabbat as long as there is a minimum amount that remains, it is still valid.

They said that one should set up an eruv for courtyards only so that the law should not be forgotten by the children. This section is usually interpreted as being independent of the previous section. The mishnah addresses the problem of why both courtyard eruvin and alley partnerships are necessary since the alley is larger, it alone should suffice to allow people to carry within its area. The mishnah explains that since alleys are bigger, children will not notice the food set aside for the alley partnership and will think that it is permitted to carry without an eruv at all. Therefore, the rabbis instituted courtyard eruvin so that children would remember that without an eruv one cannot carry things out of one’s house into the courtyard or alley, nor carry things within those two areas. Some commentators explain that this is why the courtyard eruv can be valid even if there only remains a minute amount of food.

בכל מערבין – the joining of borders/תחומין , whereas, if were the joining of courtyards, we don’t made an Eruv other than with [a loaf of] bread. But however, that Rabbi Eliezer stated here that we make an Eruv with everything includes joining of courtyards with a half-a-loaf of bread and we don’t need a complete loaf, but Rabbi Yehoshua disputes him and states that specifically, an Eruv is a complete loaf. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua.

Introduction In today’s mishnah Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua disagree over whether one can set up an eruv with a broken loaf of bread.

אין מערבין בה – and the reason is because of enmity/hostility that the members of the courtyard come to a dispute to state: “I gave a full loaf, and he [only] gave one-half/part of [a loaf].”

They may set up an eruv or a shittuf with all kinds [of food] except for water or salt, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Joshua says: a whole loaf of bread is a valid eruv. Even a baking of one se’ah, if it is a broken loaf, may not be used for eruv while a loaf of the size of an issar, provided it is whole, may be used for eruv. The first line of this mishnah was already taught above in mishnah 3:1, but the context there was border eruvin (eruvei techumin), while here it is courtyard eruvin and alley partnerships (shittufim). Everyone agrees that all types of food except salt and water may be used to set up an eruv. The disagreement in our mishnah is about whether a broken loaf of bread may be used. According to Rabbi Eliezer even a broken loaf is valid. Rabbi Joshua disagrees and holds that only a full loaf is valid. Even if it contains a large amount of dough, even a full seah, if it is broken it is not valid. However, if it is a complete loaf, even if it small, it can count towards one’s eruv. According to the Rambam, a full loaf can constitute an eruv even if it doesn’t meet the minimum requirements listed above in mishnah eight. However, according to Rashi, the small loaf counts towards the eruv, but doesn’t count as the whole eruv unless the minimum requirements are met.

ככר מאיסר והוא שלם מערבין בו – they place it in the Eruv with the rest of the loaves of the members of the courtyard, as long as there will be among all of them the equivalent of a dried fig for each and every one. But Maimonides explained (see Hilkhot Eruvin, Chapter 1, Halakha 8), that a full loaf [of bread] the size of an Issar’s worth (i.e., 8 pennies), we make an Eruv with it alone for all the members of the courtyard and it does not require a [specific] quantity.

נותן אדם מעה לחנוני – the person who sells win, and lives with him in the alleyway.

A man may give a ma’ah to a shopkeeper or a baker in order to acquire a share in the eruv, the words of Rabbi Eliezer.
The sages say: his money acquires no share for him
They agree that in the case of all other men his money may acquire [an eruv for him],
Since they do not prepare an eruv except with one’s consent.
Rabbi Judah says: To what does this apply? To Shabbat border eruvin, but in the case of courtyard eruvin they prepare an eruv with his consent and without his consent, since they confer a benefit on a person in his absence but they do not confer a disability on a person except in his presence.
This mishnah discusses one person’s ability to set up an eruv for someone else.
Section one: According to Rabbi Eliezer, a person can give a small amount of money (a ma’ah, which is a small coin) to a baker or shopkeeper in order that they will contribute from their food toward the eruv on his behalf. The coin acquires for him the food for the eruv and it is as if he is contributing directly toward the eruv.
Section two: The sages disagree because money cannot acquire movable property (things see the first chapter of Kiddushin). In order to acquire something, one must lift it up or at least pull it towards himself. Therefore, he has not acquired the food that the shopkeeper gives for the eruv. Therefore, he has not effectively contributed to the eruv.
Section three: The sages agree with Rabbi Eliezer that if he gives the money to a different person, meaning some sort of agent, and the agent buys the food from the shopkeeper or baker, this is an effective means to set up an eruv. This is effective because the person’s agent validly acquires the food from the shopkeeper or baker by actually taking it from him. Similarly, a person can ask a shopkeeper to set up an eruv on his behalf, since the shopkeeper will give the food to another person, causing the other person to acquire the food, and therefore the shopkeeper is acting as the person’s agent. The only problematic situation is if the person says to the shopkeeper that his money should acquire the eruv since money cannot effect acquisition, this type of eruv setup is invalid.
Section four: Although this section seems attached to the previous one, it is actually separate. According to the first opinion, one cannot set up an eruv without the consent of the person who will benefit from the eruv. This is true, according to this opinion, for both Shabbat border eruvin and courtyard eruvin. Rabbi Judah, on the other hand, says there is a difference between the two types of eruvin. Consent is required to set up a Shabbat border eruv for someone because there is some “disability” in this as well. Namely, if the Shabbat border eruv extends his ability to travel outside the city toward one direction, he loses a commensurate amount in the other direction. Hence, one cannot set up a Shabbat border eruv for someone without his permission. However, one only gains by having a courtyard eruv set up on his behalf and therefore, one can set up a courtyard eruv for someone without their consent.

או לנחתום – the person who sells loaves [of bread] and lives with him in the courtyard, that he should obtain a privilege for him in the Eruv with his fellows. If the members of the alleyway come to acquire from you wine in partnership, or the members of the courtyard to acquire loaves [of bread] for the Eruv, that I will have a portion in it.

לא זכו לו מעותיו – for money does not purchase until he “pulls,” and even that this storekeeper made an Eruv for all of the others and to effect a possession also to that one, it is not an Eruv, for behold, he did not intend to cause him possess through a gift for nothing like the rest who effect a possession in the Eruv, other than that he should acquire it through a M’ah, for behold, he does not acquire it for him, for money does not acquire and it is found that the makes an Eruv for him with his money.

ומודים בשאר כל אדם – the houseowner whose fellow said to him: “Here is this M’ah; and effect possession for me in the Eruv, and he went and obtained the privilege for, for he acquired an Eruv. But since the houseowner does not customarily sell loaves of bread, he did not intend for this, but rather, to make him an agent and it would be made like one who said to him – “make an Eruv for me.”

שאין מערבין לאדם – when they make an Eruv for him from on his own, but rather [it should be done] with his knowledge. Therefore, regarding the storekeeper, when he said to him, “effect possession [in the Eruv],” he did not intend other than to acquire from him, but he did not rely upon him that he should become his agent, but money does not purchase/acquire, and he didn’t rely upon him; it is found that he is enabling possession [of the Eruv] for him without his knowledge/consent.

עירובי תחומין – it is a liability that he loses to the side of the other, and perhaps it is not pleasing to him. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.