עירובין 45:2 — Soncino English Talmud

PROVIDED THE ONE DOES NOT CARRY OUT ANYTHING FROM HIS LIMIT INTO THAT OF THE OTHER. IF THERE WERE THREE MEN AND THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF THE MIDDLE ONE OVERLAPPED WITH THE RESPECTIVE LIMITS OF THE OTHERS, HE IS PERMITTED TO EAT WITH EITHER OF THEM AND EITHER OF THEM IS PERMITTED TO EAT WITH HIM, BUT THE TWO OUTER PERSONS ARE FORBIDDEN TO EAT WITH ONE ANOTHER. R. SIMEON REMARKED: TO WHAT MAY THIS CASE BE COMPARED? TO THREE COURTYARDS THAT OPEN ONE INTO THE OTHER AND ALSO INTO A PUBLIC DOMAIN, WHERE, IF THE TWO OUTER ONES MADE AN ‘ERUB WITH THE MIDDLE ONE, IT IS PERMITTED TO HAVE ACCESS TO THEM AND THEY ARE PERMITTED ACCESS TO IT, BUT THE TWO OUTER ONES ARE FORBIDDEN ACCESS TO ONE ANOTHER. GEMARA. Raba enquired: What is R. Johanan b. Nuri's view? Does he hold that ownerless objects do acquire their place in respect of the Sabbath, and consequently, it would have been proper that he should express his disagreement [with the Sages] in respect of inanimate objects and the only reason why [he and the Sages] expressed their dispute in connection with a human being was to inform you how far the view of the Rabbis extends, viz., that although it might be argued, ‘Since a man who is awake acquires his place a man asleep should also acquire his place’, hence we were informed that no [such argument is admissible]; or is it likely that R. Johanan b. Nuri holds that elsewhere ownerless objects do not acquire their place in respect of the Sabbath and the reason for his ruling here is this: Since a man awake acquires his place so does also a man asleep? — R. Joseph replied: Come and hear: If rain fell on the eve of a festival the water may be carried within a radius of two thousand cubits In any direction, but if it fell on a festival day the water is on a par with the feet of every man. Now if you grant that R. Johanan b. Nuri is of the opinion that ownerless objects acquire their place in respect of the Sabbath this ruling, you may say, represents the view of R. Johanan; but if you contend that ownerless objects do not acquire their place in respect of the Sabbath, whose view, [it may be asked], is here represented? Is it neither that of. R. Johanan nor that of the Rabbis? Abaye sat at his studies and discoursed on this subject when R. Safra said to him: Is it not possible that we are dealing here with a case where the rain fell near a town and the townspeople relied on that rain? — This, the other replied, cannot be entertained at all. For we learned: A cistern belonging to an individual person is on a par with that individual's feet, and one belonging to a town is on a par with the feet of the people of that town, and one used by the Babylonian pilgrims is on a par with the feet of any man who draws the water. Now it was also taught: ‘The water of a cistern Used by the tribes may be moved within a radius of two thousand cubits in any direction’. Are not [then] the two rulings mutually contradictory? Consequently it must be conceded that the latter represents the view of R. Johanan while the former represents that of the Rabbis. When he came to R. Joseph and told him such and such a thing said R. Safra and such and such did I reply, the other remarked: ‘Why did you not argue with him from that very statement: If it could be entertained that we were dealing with a case where the rain fell near a town then, instead of ruling that the water may be moved within a distance of two thousand cubits in any direction, should it not have been ruled that it was on a par with the feet of the people of that town?’ The Master said: ‘If [it fell] on a festival day the water is on a par with the feet of every man’. But why? Should not the rain water acquire its place for the Sabbath in the ocean? Must it then be assumed that this ruling is not in agreement with the view of R. Eliezer? For if it were in agreement with R. Eliezer [the objection would arise:] Did he not state that all the world drinks from the water of the ocean? — R. Isaac replied: Here we are dealing with a case where the clouds were formed on the eve of the festival. But is it not possible that those moved away and these are others? — It is a case where one can recognize them by some identification mark. And if you prefer I might reply: This is a matter of doubt in respect of a Rabbinical law and in any such doubt a lenient ruling is adopted. But why should not the water acquire its place for the Sabbath in the clouds? May it then be derived from this that the law of the Sabbath limits does not apply to the air above a height often handbreadths, for if the law of Sabbath limits were at that height applicable the water should have acquired its place for the Sabbath in the clouds? — I may in fact maintain that the law of Sabbath limits is applicable [even at the height mentioned] but the water is absorbed in clouds.51^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ^ᵃᵏ^ᵃˡ^ᵃᵐ^ᵃⁿ^ᵃᵒ^ᵃᵖ^ᵃᵠ^ᵃʳ^ᵃˢ^ᵃᵗ^ᵃᵘ^ᵃᵛ^ᵃʷ^ᵃˣ^ᵃʸ

^ᵃnote:Even with his hand, though his body remains within his own limit.
^ᵇnote:Sc. the parts of the respective limits which do not overlap. A person's cattle or inanimate objects may not be moved on the Sabbath beyond the limit within which he himself is permitted to move (cf. Bezah 37a).
^ᶜnote:While the limits of the latter did not overlap each other; where, for instance, the distance between the positions of the two men at the extremities was eight cubits and that between either of them and the middle one was six cubits.
^ᵈnote:In the overlapping spaces that are respectively common to him and to them.
^ᵉnote:Since they have no ground in common.
^ᶠnote:So that each is self contained. Courtyards that open into one another and have no direct exit into a public domain, being interdependent, are forbidden domains as regards movement on the Sabbath except where the residents joined in a common ‘erub.
^ᵍnote:Through their communicating doors respectively.
^ʰnote:The middle courtyard.
^ⁱnote:Having no direct communication with each other.
^ʲnote:In laying down in the first clause of our Mishnah that the man is ENTITLED TO MOVE WITHIN TWO THOUSAND CUBITS.
^ᵏnote:Whose radius of movement cannot obviously be determined, as in the case of owned property, by the intentions of an owner.
^ˡnote:Sc. that no one even with an ‘erub may move them from that position beyond a distance of two thousand cubits.
^ᵐnote:Lit., ‘vessels’, that are ownerless. A man asleep being unable to think, is, in respect of intention to spend the Sabbath in a particular spot, like ownerless objects that have no owner by whose intention their place for the Sabbath could be determined.
^ⁿnote:In the case of a human being.
^ᵒnote:And the Sages still maintain that a man asleep does not acquire his place for the Sabbath.
^ᵖnote:Since at the time the festival began it was already on the ground.
^ᵠnote:From the spot where it fell; because it acquired, so to speak, its place when the Sabbath had begun (cf. prev. note).
^ʳnote:So that it could not acquire any place on the ground at the time the festival began.
^ˢnote:I.e., it may be carried in a radius within which any man who uses it may himself move.
^ᵗnote:That if rain fell on the eve of a festival the water may be carried only within a radius of two thousand cubits from the spot on which it fell.
^ᵘnote:According to which rain water, like ownerless objects, acquires its place in respect of the Sabbath.
^ᵛnote:In the opinion of R. Johanan.
^ʷnote:The authorship of the Baraitha just cited and discussed.
^ˣnote:Cf. supra n. 1.
^ʸnote:For their water supply. As it was the townspeople's intention to use the water the latter rightly acquires the place on which it fell. The Baraitha, therefore, could provide no proof that objects having no owner can also acquire their place for the Sabbath.
^ᶻnote:R. Safra's suggestion.
^ᵃᵃnote:Because on account of the following apparently contradictory rulings one is driven to the conclusion that R. Johanan must be of the opinion that ownerless objects do acquire this place.
^ᵃᵇnote:Should another person draw the water on a Sabbath or a festival day he may not carry it beyond the radius within which the owner of the cistern may move.
^ᵃᶜnote:A radius of two thousand cubits in any direction from the town.
^ᵃᵈnote:On their way to Jerusalem.
^ᵃᵉnote:Since it was at the disposal of anyone who cared to use it and had the status of ownerless property.
^ᵃᶠnote:Because ownerless objects are acquired by the man who first lifts them up. Should the man who first drew the water subsequently give it to another person its movements would nevertheless be restricted to the radius within which the first man may move. Thus it follows that ownerless objects do not acquire their place for the Sabbath.
^ᵃᵍnote:I.e., the pilgrims on their way to the Holy City.
^ᵃʰnote:From its place. Which proves that ownerless objects do acquire their place for the Sabbath.
^ᵃⁱnote:Cf. supra p. 316, n. 13 and prev. note.
^ᵃʲnote:In order to remove the apparent contradiction.
^ᵃᵏnote:Abaye.
^ᵃˡnote:Which R. Joseph cited supra.
^ᵃᵐnote:From the spot on which it fell.
^ᵃⁿnote:Of course it should. The ruling consequently proves that R. Safra's suggestion is unacceptable.
^ᵃᵒnote:Where it was at the time the festival began before it was converted into cloud. As it was carried on the festival in the form of cloud beyond its Sabbath limit its movements should be restricted to a radius of four cubits only.
^ᵃᵖnote:Since the water may be moved within a radius of two thousand cubits.
^ᵃᵠnote:So that the water had left the ocean before the festival began.
^ᵃʳnote:The clouds that were seen on the festival eve.
^ᵃˢnote:That released the rain on the festival.
^ᵃᵗnote:That were formed after the festival had begun from the water that was still in the ocean at the time the festival had set in (cf. supra n. 7).
^ᵃᵘnote:Whether the clouds on the festival day are identical with those that were on the horizon on the eve of the festival or not.
^ᵃᵛnote:It may in consequence be properly assumed that the clouds were the same on both days.
^ᵃʷnote:Where it presumably was at the time the festival began. The movement of the water should consequently be restricted to a radius of four cubits.
^ᵃˣnote:Since it was ruled that the water was on a par with the feet of every man.
^ᵃʸnote:As it is not exposed it is regarded as non-existent and cannot consequently acquire its place for the Sabbath before it reaches the ground in the form of water.