Eruvin

R. Joseph.1 however, replied:2 R. Simeon and the Rabbis differ on the same principle as that on which R. Johanan b. Nuri and the Rabbis differ.3 For we learned: If some oil4 floated on wine4 and a tebul yom5 touched the oil, he6 causes the oil only to be unfit;7 but R. Johanan b. Nuri ruled: They both form a connection with each other.8 The Rabbis9 may hold the same view as the Rabbis10 while R. Simeon9 may hold the same view as R. Johanan b. Nuri.11 It was taught: R. Eleazar12 b. Taddai ruled: In either case13 it is necessary for them to join in an erub. Even if the partnership was with the one In wine and with the other also in wine?14 Rabbah explained: Where this [householder] comes with his lagin15 [of wine] and pours [it into the common cask] and the other comes with his lagin and pours it in, no one disputes the ruling that16 this alone is a valid ‘erub.17 They only differ where the householders bought a cask of wine in partnership.18 R. Eleazar b. Taddai is of the opinion that there is no such rule as bererah19 while the Rabbis maintain that the rule of bererah holds good.20 R. Joseph explained: R. Eleazar b. Taddai and the Rabbis differ on the question whether it is permissible to rely upon shittuf15 where an ‘erub is required.21 the one Master22 holding that It is not permissible to rely on it23 while the Masters24 maintain that it is permissible to rely on it.25 Said R. Joseph: Whence do I derive this?26 [From the following:] Since Rab Judah stated in the name of Rab, ‘The halachah is in agreement with R. Meir’27 and R. Berona stated in the name of Rab, ‘The halachah is in agreement with R. Eleazar b. Taddai’.28 Now what is the reason?29 Obviously30 because both rulings are based on the same principle.27 Said Abaye to him: If the principle is the same what need was there to lay down the halachah, twice?31 — It is of this that we are informed: That in matters of32 ‘erub we [sometimes] adopt33 two restrictive rulings.34 What is the ruling of R. Meir and what is that of the Rabbis?35 [Those about which] it was taught: An ‘erub of courtyards must be prepared with bread; but wine, even if preferred. may not be Used for ‘erub,36 Shittuf of an alley may be done even37 with wine;38 but bread, if preferred. may [obviously]39 be used for the shittuf. An ‘erub must be prepared for courtyards40 even where shittuf is arranged for the alleys41 in order that the law of ‘erub may not be forgotten by the children who might believe that their fathers42 had been preparing no ‘erub; so R. Meir. The Sages, however, ruled: Either ‘erub or shittuf [is enough]. R. Nehumi43 and Rabbah44 differ on the interpretation of this statement. One maintains that in the case of bread45 no one disputes the ruling that one46 is enough47 and that they only differ in the case of wine,48 alley. ‘erub. common contents of the cask. exempts the tenants of the courtyards from ‘erub for the purpose of carrying objects from one courtyard into the other. united in their courtyards; and they are consequently permitted to convey objects from one courtyard into another through doors that open from one into the other. the purpose of ‘erub. principle underlying R. Eleazar b. Taddai's ruling would have been unascertainable, and erroneous conclusions affecting the laws of ‘erub might have been arrived at (cf. Rashi); but why, it is asked, was it also necessary for Rab to state that the halachah is in agreement with R. Eleazar b. Taddai? agreement with R. Meir that where an ‘erub is required, shittuf may not be relied upon irrespective of whether it was done with (a) wine concerning which the Rabbis agree with him or (b) bread about which the Rabbis differ. commodities is regarded as important enough to constitute one. ‘dwellings’ (cf. supra n. 5). for several courtyards together, to enable their tenants to have access to each other through their courtyard doors. this is forbidden, though the right of carrying through the communicating doors remains unaffected. In the case of shittuf it is permitted to carry objects between the courtyards either through the alley or through their communicating doors even where each courtyard had prepared a separate ‘erub for its own tenants only. while according to the Rabbis once wine has become effective in shittuf it is ipso facto effective for ‘erub, since shittuf may be relied upon where an ‘erub is required.