Parallel
עירובין 42:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
If a man was measuring [the distance from his ‘erub] and advancing [towards another town], and his measuring [of the permitted two thousand cubits] terminated in the middle of the town, he is allowed to move objects throughout the town provided only that he does not pass his Sabbath limit. Now, in what manner could he move the objects? Obviously by throwing. And R. Huna? — He can answer you: No; by pulling. R. Huna ruled: If a man was measuring [the distance from his ‘erub] and his measuring [of the permitted two thousand cubits] terminated in the middle of a courtyard he has only a half of the courtyard [in which to move]. Is not this obvious? — Read: He has a half of the courtyard [in which to move]. Is not this also obvious? — It might have been presumed that there was cause to fear that one might carry objects about all the courtyard, hence we were informed [that no such possibility need be considered]. R. Nahman stated: Huna agrees with me that if a man was measuring [the distance from his ‘erub] and was thus advancing [towards another town], and his measurement [of the two thousand cubits] terminated at [a line corresponding to] the edge of a roof he is allowed to move objects in any part of the house. What is the reason? Because [the projection of] the roof of the house would strike him. R. Huna son of R. Nathan said: [The divergence of opinion here is] like that between the following Tannas: IF HE WAS TAKEN TO ANOTHER TOWN, OR IF HE WAS PUT IN A CATTLEPEN OR IN A CATTLE-FOLD, HE MAY, RULED R. GAMALIEL AND R. ELEAZAR B. AZARIAH, MOVE THROUGH THE WHOLE OF ITS AREA; BUT R. JOSHUA AND R. AKIBA RULED: HE HAS ONLY FOUR CUBITS. Now did not R. Gamaliel and R. Eleazar b. Azariah rule that the man may MOVE THROUGH THE WHOLE OF ITS AREA, because they do not forbid walking in a cattle-pen Or in a cattle-fold as a preventive measure against the possibility of walking in a valley, and since evidently they have not forbidden walking [in the former] as a preventive measure against walking [in the latter] they, likewise, did not forbid the moving of objects [by throwing them beyond the Sabbath limit] as a preventive measure against the possibility of walking [beyond that limit]; while R. Joshua and R. Akiba ruled: HE HAS ONLY FOUR CUBITS because they forbid walking in a cattle-pen or in a cattle-fold as a preventive measure against walking in a valley; and since evidently they have forbidden walking [in the former] as a preventive measure against walking [in the latter] they also forbid the moving of objects [by throwing them beyond the Sabbath limit] as a preventive measure against the possibility of walking [beyond that limit]? — Whence [could this be proved]? It is in fact possible that R. Gamaliel and R. Eleazar b. Azariah did not forbid walking in a cattle-pen or in a cattle-fold as a preventive measure against the possibility of walking in a valley for the sole reason that two different places are there involved, but [as regards forbidding the] movement of objects [as a preventive measure] against the possibility of walking which involves one and the same place they may well have enacted a prohibition as a preventive measure against the possibility of being drawn after one's object. As to R. Joshua and R. Akiba also, whence [could it be proved that they restricted the walking to four cubits] because they have enacted a preventive measure? — It is in fact possible that [the reason for their restriction is] that they hold the view that all the house is regarded as four cubits only while a man occupied a place within its walls while it was yet day but not where he did not occupy the place while it was yet day. Rab laid down: The law is in agreement with R. Gamaliel in respect of a cattle-pen, a cattle-fold and a ship; and Samuel laid down: The law is in agreement with R. Gamaliel in respect of a ship but not in respect of a cattle-pen or a cattle-fold. Both at any rate agree that the law is in agreement with R. Gamaliel in respect of a ship; what is the reason? — Rabbah replied: Because the man has occupied a place within its walls while it was yet day. R. Zera replied: Because the ship continually takes him from the beginning of four cubits and puts him down at the end of the four cubits. What is the practical difference between them? — The practical difference between them is the case where the sides of the ship were broken down, or where one leaps from one ship into another. But why does not R. Zera give the same reason as Rabbah? — He can answer you: The sides37
—