Eruvin

was drawn away1 or suspended2 [at a distance of] less than three handbreadths [from the walls of the alley] there is no need to provide another beam,3 [but if the distance was] three handbreadths another beam must be provided. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel ruled: [If the distance was] less than four handbreadths there is no need to provide another beam4 [but if it was] four handbreadths another beam must be provided.5 Does not ‘drawn away’ [mean that the beam was altogether] outside [the alley],6 and ‘suspended’ [that it was] within?7 No; both8 [refer to a beam] within the alley, but by ‘drawn away [was meant that the beam was drawn away] from one side,9 and by ‘suspended’ [that it was drawn away] from both sides.10 [As] it might have been assumed [that the law of] labud11 is applied12 [only where the beam is removed] from one side but not13 [when it is removed] from the two sides, hence we were informed [that in the latter case also the law of labud11 applies]. R. Ashi14 replied: [The meaning is that the beam was] drawn away [from the walls] and also suspended. And how is this to be imagined? [That a man], for instance, inserted on the tops of the two side-walls of an alley respectively two slanting pins15 whose height16 is less than17 three handbreadths18 and whose slant also19 is less than three handbreadths.20 [Since] it might be assumed that we call apply either the law of labud21 or that of habut,21 but not that of both labud and habut, hence we were informed [that both may also be applied]. R. Zakkai recited in the presence of R. Johanan: [The space] between the side-posts and beneath the cross-beam is subject to the laws of a karmelith.22 ‘Go out’, the other told him, ‘recite this outside’.23 Said Abaye: It stands to reason that the view of R. Johanan24 [applies to the space] under the beam25 but [that] between the side-posts26 is forbidden. Raba, however, said: [The space] between the side-posts26 is also permitted. Said Rabbi: Why27 do I say this? Because when R. Dimi came28 he reported in the name of R. Johanan: In a place29 whose area is less than30 four by four [handbreadths]31 it is permissible32 for both the people of the public domain and those of the private domain to rearrange their burdens,33 provided only that they do not exchange them.34 And Abaye?35 — There36 [it is a case] where [the place] was three handbreadths in height.37 Said Abaye: Why27 do I say this?38 Because R. Hama b. Goria said in the name of Rab: [The space] within a gateway39 requires40 a special41 side-post to render it permissible.42 And should you suggest that [this43 is one] where the area is four handbreadths by four,44 surely, [it can be retorted] R. Hanin45 b. Raba45 stated on the authority of Rab: [The space] within a gateway, though it is less than four handbreadths by four, requires a special46 side-post to render its use permitted. And Raba?47 — There [it is a case where the alley] opens out into a karmelith.48 Is this,49 however, permitted [where the alley opens out] into a public domain? The native [then would be] in the earth and the stranger in the highest heavens? 50 Yes, the like51 has found its like and is aroused.52 Said R. Huna son of R. Joshua to Raba: Do you not uphold the view that [according to R. Johanan, the space] between side-posts is forbidden? Surely, Rabbah b. Bar Hana stated in the name of R. Johanan: If [a section of one side of] an alley was lined with side-posts53 [fixed within distances of] less54 than four [handbreadths55 between one another, the question of its use] is dependent56 on the dispute between R. Simeon b. Gamaliel and the Rabbis.57 [Now this obviously means, does it not, that] according to R. Simeon b. Gamaliel, who ruled [that in respect of such distances the law of] labud is applied,58 one is allowed to the [the alley from the interior thereof only] up to the inner edge of the innermost post59 and that according to the Rabbis, who ruled [that in respect of a distance of more than three handbreadths, the law of] labud is not applied,60 one is allowed to use [the alley] up to the inner edge of the outermost post,61 but [the use of the space] between side-posts is unanimously62 forbidden?63 And Raba?64 — There also [it is a case] where [the alley] opens out into a karmelith. Would this, however, be permitted [where the alley opened out] into a public domain? The native [then would be] in the earth and the stranger in the highest heavens? — Yes, the like has found its like and is aroused.65 either side of the entrance. in the air. handbreadths. alley walls. sides when it could be easily inferred from that of one side where the very same principle is involved. horizontally. in which the free movement of objects is permitted. virtual partition between the alley and the public domain. or vice versa. (Shab. 8b, infra 77a). For a similar reason (v. supra n. 10) the space between the side-posts, not being of sufficient size to constitute a domain of its own, assumes the same status as the spot spoken of by R. Johanan. comparatively small and level with the ground, is not in any way distinguishable from the domains adjoining it; and, if its use were permitted, people would erroneously assume that it is permitted to carry objects from a public domain into a private domain or vice versa. Hence the prohibition. formed by the side-posts, remains forbidden. Rabbinically forbidden from the karmelith which adjoins it and which is also Rabbinically forbidden. Rabbinically forbidden domain, requires a side-post how much more so one that opens into a public domain which is Pentateuchally forbidden independent existence if it is situated between a private and a public domain, to neither of which it is akin and to neither of which it can be joined. If, however, it adjoins a karmelith on one side it is deemed to have regained its existence as a karmelith by being regarded as a part of the larger domain. is subject to the law of the ‘space between the side-posts’. the first post that is fixed nearest the entrance.