Parallel
עירובין 93:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
All embankment five handbreadths high and a partition on it five handbreadths high are not combined since it is necessary that the entire height shall be contained either in the embankment or in the partition. b An objection was raised: If there were two courtyards one higher than the other, and the upper one is ten handbreadths higher than the lower one, or has an embankment fGve handbreadths high and a partition five handbreadths high, two separate ‘erubs may be prepared but not one. If it was lower, only a single ‘erub may be prepared but not two ‘erubs! — Raba replied: R. Hisda agrees in the case of the lower courtyard, since its tenants can see a frontage of ten handbreadths. If so, [should not the tenants of] the lower [courtyard] prepare an ‘erub [as in the case of] two [separated courtyards] but not a single one, while those of the upper one should neither prepare a single one [for the two courtyards] nor one for themselves alone? — Rabbah b. Ulla replied: [This deals with a case,] for instance, where the upper courtyard had rims [that left a gap] not wider than ten cubits. If so, read the final clause: ‘If it was lower, only a single ‘erub may be prepared but not two should not the tenants be allowed to prepare one ‘erub if they wished or, if they preferred it, two? — Rabbah son of Raba replied: This deals with a case, for instance, where the gap extended along a whole side of the lower courtyard. If so should not the tenants of the lower one be allowed to prepare a single ‘erub [jointly] but not one for themselves alone while those of the upper one should be allowed, if they wished it, to prepare an ‘erub for themselves alone or, if they preferred it, a single ‘erub jointly? — This is so indeed, and the ruling, ‘If it was lower, only a single ‘erub may be prepared but not two’ applies to the tenants of the lower one. Amemar made the following exposition: An embankment five handbreadths high and a partition on it five handbreadths high are combined. When Rabina met R. Aha son of Raba he asked him, ‘Did the Master learn anything about a partition?’ the other replied: ‘No’; and the law is that an embankment five handbreadths high and a partition on it five handbreadths high are combined. R. Hoshaia enquired: Do tenants who arrive on the Sabbath impose restrictions? — R. Hisda replied: Come and hear: IF THE FULL WIDTH OF A WALL OF A SMALL COURTYARD WAS BROKEN DOWN SO THAT THE YARD FULLY OPENED INTO A LARGE COURTYARD, THE USE OF THE LARGER ONE IS PERMITTED, BUT THAT OF THE SMALLER ONE IS FORBIDDEN BECAUSE THE GAP IS REGARDED AS A DOORWAY TO THE FORMER. Is it not possible to assume’, Rabbah objected, ‘that the breach occurred while it was yet day?’ Said Abaye to him, Do not say: Master, ‘It is possible to assume’ but rather, ‘It is ‘certain that the breach occurred while it was yet day’, for, surely, it was the Master himself who stated: ‘I enquired of R. Huna and also of Rab Judah as to what was the law where an ‘erub was laid in reliance on a certain door and that door was blocked up, or on a certain window and that window was stopped up? And each replied: Since permission for that Sabbath was once granted the permissibility continues until the conclusion of the day’. It was stated: If a wall between two courtyards collapsed, Rab ruled, it is permitted to move objects within four cubits only, but Samuel ruled:
—