Eruvin — Daf 87b

הכא רשויות דרבנן

והא ר' יוחנן ברשויות דרבנן נמי אמר (דתניא) כותל שבין ב' חצירות גבוה י' טפחים ורוחב ארבעה מערבין שנים ואין מערבין אחד

היו בראשו פירות אלו עולין מכאן ואוכלין ואלו עולין מכאן ואוכלין

נפרץ הכותל עד עשר אמות מערבין שנים ואם רצו מערבין אחד מפני שהוא כפתח יותר מכאן מערבין אחד ואין מערבין שנים

והוינן בה אין בו ארבעה מאי אמר רב אויר ב' רשויות שולטת בו ולא יזיז בו מלא נימא

ורבי יוחנן אמר אלו מעלין מכאן ואוכלין ואלו מעלין מכאן ואוכלין

ואזדא רבי יוחנן לטעמיה דכי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי יוחנן מקום שאין בו ארבעה על ארבעה מותר לבני רה"ר ולבני רה"י לכתף עליו ובלבד שלא יחליפו

ההיא זעירי אמרה ולזעירי קשיא הא

זעירי מוקים לה באמת המים גופה ורב דימי תנאי היא

ותיהוי כי חורי כרמלית

אביי בר אבין ורב חנינא בר אבין דאמרי תרוייהו אין חורין לכרמלית

רב אשי אמר אפילו תימא יש חורין לכרמלית ה"מ בסמוכה הכא במופלגת

רבינא אמר כגון דעבד לה ניפקי אפומה

ואזדו רבנן לטעמייהו ור' שמעון בן גמליאל לטעמיה:

מתני׳ גזוזטרא שהיא למעלה מן המים אין ממלאין הימנה בשבת אלא אם כן עשו לה מחיצה גבוהה עשרה טפחים בין מלמעלה בין מלמטה

וכן שתי גזוזטראות זו למעלה מזו עשו לעליונה ולא עשו לתחתונה שתיהן אסורות עד שיערבו:

גמ׳ מתניתין דלא כחנניא בן עקביא דתניא חנניא בן עקביא אומר גזוזטרא שיש בה ד' על ד' אמות חוקק בה ד' על ד' וממלא

אמר ר' יוחנן משום רבי יוסי בן זימרא לא התיר רבי חנניא בן עקביא אלא בימה של טבריא הואיל ויש לה אוגנים ועיירות וקרפיפות מקיפות אותה אבל בשאר מימות לא

ת"ר ג' דברים התיר רבי חנניא בן עקביא לאנשי טבריא ממלאין מים מגזוזטרא בשבת וטומנין בעצה ומסתפגין באלונטית

ממלאין מים מגזוזטרא בשבת הא דאמרן וטומנין בעצה מאי היא דתניא השכים להביא פסולת אם בשביל שיש עליו טל הרי הוא בכי יותן

ואם בשביל שלא יבטל ממלאכתו אינו בכי יותן וסתם

while here we are dealing with Rabbinical domains.1 But did not R. Johanan maintain his view2 even in the case of Rabbinical domains? For we learned:3 — If between two courtyards there was a wall ten handbreadths high and four handbreadths thick, two ‘erubs may be prepared but not one. If there was fruit on the top of it, the tenants on either side may climb up and eat there. If a breach to the extent of ten cubits was made in the wall, the tenants may prepare two ‘erubs or, if they prefer, only one, because it is like a doorway. If the breach was bigger, only one ‘erub and not two may be prepared’.4 And when the question was raised, What is the ruling where it was not four handbreadths wide?’ Rab replied: ‘The air of two domains prevails upon it and no object on it may be moved even as far as a hair's breadth’; whereas R. Johanan replied: ‘The tenants on either side may carry up their food and eat it there’,5 R. Johanan thus6 following his own view; since R. Dimi, when he came,7 stated in the name of R. Johanan: On a place whose area is less than four handbreadths by four both the people in the public domain and those in the private domain may re-arrange their loads provided they do not exchange their!8 — That9 was reported by Ze'iri.10 But does not this11 present an objection against Ze'iri? — Ze'iri explains it12 to refer to the water-channel itself,13 while the ruling of R. Dimi14 is one in dispute between Tannas. But why should it15 not be regarded as the cavities of a karmelith?16 — Both Abaye b. Abin and R. Hanina b. Abin replied: The law of cavities17 does not apply to a karmelith.18 R. Ashi replied: It may even be conceded that the law of cavities does apply to a karmelith, but this is the case only where the cavity is near19 whereas here it20 is far removed21 Rabina replied: We are dealing22 in with a case, for instance, where outlets were made at its23 ends,24 the Rabbis25 following their view,26 while R. Simeon b. Gamaliel27 follows his view.28 MISHNAH. FROM A BALCONY THAT WAS SITUATED ABOVE A STRETCH OF WATER NO WATER MAY BE DRAWN29 ON THE SABBATH30 UNLESS IT WAS FURNISHED WITH A PARTITION31 TEN HANDBREADTHS HIGH EITHER ABOVE32 OR BELOW.33 SO ALSO WHERE TWO BALCONIES WERE SITUATED IN POSITIONS ONE HIGHER THAN34 THE OTHER,35 AND A PARTITION WAS MADE FOR THE UPPER ONE BUT NOT FOR THE LOWER ONE, RESTRICTIONS36 ARE IMPOSED ON THE USE OF BOTH37 UNTIL THEY HAVE PREPARED A JOINT ‘ERUB.38 GEMARA. Is our Mishnah39 in disagreement with the view of Hananya b. Akabya, since it was taught: Hananya b. Akabya ruled: In a balcony whose area is four cubits by four a hole of four handbreadths by four is cut40 and water may be drawn through it?41 — R. Johanan citing R. Jose b. Zimra replied: R. Hananya b. Akabya permitted it42 only in the case of the sea of Tiberias since it is surrounded by embankments, towns and karpafs,43 but not in that of any other waters.44 Our Rabbis taught: R. Hananya b. Akabya permitted the men of Tiberias three things: To draw water from a balcony45 on the Sabbath, to store fruit in pea-stalks46 and to dry themselves with a towel.46 ‘To draw water from a balcony on the Sabbath’ as has just been stated; what, however, was the point of the permission ‘to store fruit in pea-stalks’? — That, as it was taught. If a man got up early in the morning47 to fetch some refuse,48 the Scriptural expression, ‘if water be put upon the seed’49 applies to it,50 if he did so51 because the dew was upon it,52 but if he did so51 in order that he might not be disturbed from his usual work, the expression. If water be put upon the seeds does not apply to it;53 and as a rule, Pentateuchally it is permitted to transfer directly from the one into the other the Rabbis have relaxed their ruling where the transfer is effected by way of a free domain. (As to the discrepancy between R. Dimi's minimum of four handbreadths and that of three handbreadths in the Baraitha cf. Rashi a.l.) only Rabbinically forbidden, how could it be maintained that a distinction is drawn between Pentateuchal and Rabbinical domains? between which is only Rabbinically forbidden. dimensions that do, or do not constitute a karmelith between which and the courtyard the movement of bucket and water is forbidden. four handbreadths imparts to it the status of a karmelith. handbreadths’. a wall adjoining a public domain are subject to the restrictions of the latter (v. Shab. 7b) so should the water-channel within the courtyard be subject to the restrictions of the wider channel without the town which is a karmelith and of which it forms a part. channel nor those of its embankments (as has been previously suggested) but those of the outlets made in the partitions at its ends to enable the water to pass through them. deemed to extend downwards and, by vertically joining balcony and water, to form a private domain through, and from which the water may be taken up. furnished with any partition that could convert the karmelith of the water and the passage to the balcony into a private domain. uncleanness unless (a) it first came in contact with dew or other prescribed liquids and (b) the owner of the produce was pleased with that contact.