Parallel
עירובין 98:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
of a wall that was not slanting and it came to rest above three handbreadths [from the ground], he may roll it back to himself; but if below the three handbreadths, HE MUST TURN IT OVER WITH ITS WRITING DOWNWARDS. R. JUDAH RULED: EVEN IF IT WAS REMOVED, FROM THE GROUND BY NO MORE THAN etc., because it is essential that the object shall come to rest on something. But then what of the statement of Raba that even if all object came within three handbreadths [from the ground] it is necessary according to the Rabbis that it shall rest on something, must it be assumed that he based his teaching on what is a dispute between Tannas? — The fact is that all this represents the view of R. Judah, but some words are missing, the correct reading being as follows: This applies only to a slanting wall, but in the case of a wall that was not slanting, even if it was below three handbreadths from the ground, he may roll it back because R. JUDAH RULED: EVEN IF IT WAS REMOVED FROM THE GROUND BY NO MORE THAN A THREADS THICKNESS, HE MAY ROLL. IT BACK TO HIMSELF. What is the reason? Because it is essential that the object shall come to rest on something. MISHNAH. IF THERE WAS A LEDGE IN FRONT OF A WINDOW IT IS PERMltted TO PUT OBJECTS UPON IT OR TO REMOVE OBJECTS FROM IT ON THE SABBATH. GEMARA. Whither did the LEDGE project? If it be suggested that it projected on to a public domain, why should no provision be made against the possibility that an object might drop and one would be tempted to carry it? If, on the other hand, it be projected on to a private domain, is not this obvious? — Abaye replied: The fact is that it projected on to a public domain, but the ruling, that IT IS PERMITTED TO PUT OBJECTS UPON IT, refers only to breakable objects. So it was also taught: If a ledge in front of a window projected into a public domain it is permitted to put upon it dishes, cups, ladles or bottles; and [it is permitted] to use all the wall as far as its lowest ten handbreadths. If there was a ledge below it one may use it, while the upper one may be used only in front of one's window. Now what kind of ledge is one to imagine? If its width was less than four handbreadths, is it not a free domain which one must not use even in front of one's window? If, on the other hand, its with was four handbreadths, why should not one be allowed to use it along the entire length of the wall? — Abaye replied: This is a case where the lower ledge was four handbreadths wide, while the upper one was not four handbreadths wide but the window-sill made it up to four handbreadths. [Consequently] One may use it in front of the window since it is regarded as an extension of the window-sill but its section on the one side or on the other remains forbidden. MISHNAH. A MAN MAY STAND IN A PRIVATE DOMAIN AND MOVE OBJECTS IN A PUBLIC DOMAIN OR HE MAY STAND IN A PUBLIC DOMAIN AND MOVE OBJECTS IN A PRIVATE DOMAIN, PROVIDED HE DOES NOT TAKE THEM BEYOND FOUR CUBITS. A MAN MAY NOT STAND IN A PRIVATE DOMAIN AND MAKE WATER IN A PUBLIC DOMAIN OR IN A PUBLIC DOMAIN AND MAKE WATER IN A PRIVATE DOMAIN, AND THE SAME APPLIES TO SPITTING. R. JUDAH RULED: EVEN WHERE A PERSON'S SPITTLE ACCUMULATED IN HIS MOUTH, HE MUST NOT WALK FOUR CUBITS BEFORE HE SPAT OUT. GEMARA. R. Hinena b. Shelemya taught Hiyya b. Rab in the presence of Rab: A man may not stand in a private domain and move objects in a public domain. ‘Do you’, he said to him, ‘ignore the Rabbis and act according to the view of R. Meir?’44
—