Eruwin — Talmud Jeruschalmi

Eruwin

Eruwin — Talmud Jeruschalmi auf Beth HaMidrash: der hebräische Text und seine deutsche Übersetzung, mit Raschi und den großen Kommentatoren. Kostenlos, online.

משנה: מָבוֹי שֶׁהוּא גָבוֹהַּ מֵעֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה יְמַעֵט. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ. וְהָרָחָב מֵעֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת יְמַעֵט. אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ צוּרַת פֶּתַח אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא רָחָב מֵעֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְמַעֵט:MISHNAH: An alley which is higher than twenty cubits should be reduced; Rebbi Jehudah says, this is not necessary 1, Note 142. The status of an alley, a narrow public road bordered by walls of houses, essentially is that of a karmelit. Since such an alley is not a thoroughfare, it is customary that under certain circumstances the dwellers in houses opening on the alley can turn it into their common private domain. A prior condition is that the alley be a dead-end street; an alley open at both ends, while not a public domain in the technical sense, does not qualify directly. The second condition, mentioned only in Mishnah 2, is that the entrance to the alley must be well defined and immediately recognizable; this is done either by placing a horizontal beam over the entrance (קוֹרַה) or placing there a vertical lath (לֶחִי). The Mishnah presumes that a beam was used; the majority holds that a beam placed higher than 20 cubits is not noticed whereas R. Jehudah holds that it always is noticed.. If it is wider than ten cubits it should be reduced; if there is a door-frame even though it is wider than ten cubits there is no need to reduce.

הלכה: מָבוֹי שֶׁהוּא גָבוֹהַּ מֵעֶשְׂרִים כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אָמַר לָהּ סְתָם. רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רַב. רַבָּנִן יָלְפִין לָהּ מִפִּתְחוֹ שֶׁלְהֵיכָל. וְרִבִּי יוּדָה יְלִיף לָהּ מִפֶּתַח הָאוּלָם. אִם מִפֶּתַח הָאוּלָם דַּייוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. פֶּתַח הָאוּלָם גָּבוֹהַּ אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה וְרוֹחָב עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. אֲפִילוּ אַרְבָּעִים חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה. תַּנֵּי בַּר קַפָּרָא. אֲפִילוּ מֵאָה אַמָּה. אַמַר רִבִּי אַבִּין. רִבִּי יוּדָה כְדַעְתֵּיהּ וְרַבָּנִן כְדַעְתְּהוֹן. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. וְכֵן גְּשָׁרִים הַמְפוּלָּשִׁין מְטַלְטְלִין תַּחְתֵּיהֶן בַּשַּׁבָּת. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוּדָה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין. הֵיךְ מַה דְתֵימַר תַּמָּן. אַתְּ רוֹאֶה אֶת הַמְּלַתֵירָה כִּילּוּ יוֹרֶדֶת וְסוֹתֶמֶת. אוּף הָכָא אַתְּ רוֹאֶה אֶת הַתִּיקְרָה כִּילּוּ יוֹרֶדֶת וְסוֹתֶמֶת. הִיא דַעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה בָסוּכָּה. הִיא דַעְתֵּיהּ בְמָבוֹי. הִיא דַעְתְּהוֹן דְּרַבָּנִן בְסוּכָּה. הִיא דַעְתְּהוֹן בְמָבוֹי. וְלֹא דַמְיָיא. יֵשׁ דְּבָרִים כְּשֵׁירִים בַּסּוּכָּה וּפְסוּלִין בְּמָבוֹי. כְּשֵׁירִין בְּמָבוֹי וּפְסוּלִין בַּסּוּכָּה. דּוּקְרָנִין כְּשֵׁירִין בַּסּוּכָּה וּפְסוּלִין בְּמָבוֹי. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. הֵבִיא אַרְבָּעָה דִּיקְרָנִין וְסִיכֵּךְ עַלֵ גַּבֵּיהֶן. סוּכָּה כְשֵׁירָה מָבוֹי פָסוּל. הָדָא דְתֵימַר. בִּגְבוֹהִין שְׁלֹשָׁה לְמַעֲלָה מִכּוֹתְלֵי הַמָּבוֹי. אֲבָל אִם אֵינָן גְבוֹהִין שְׁלֹשָׁה מִכּוֹתְלֵי הַמָּבוֹי כָּשֵׁר. בְּשֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן רוֹחָב אַרְבָּעָה. אֲבָל אִם יֵשׁ בָּהֶן רוֹחָב אַרְבָּעָה אֲפִילוּ גְבוֹהִין כַּמָּה כָּשֵׁר. דְּפָנוֹת כְּשֵׁירוֹת בַּסּוּכָּה וּפְסוּלוֹת בְּמָבוֹי. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. שְׁתַּיִם כְּהִילְכַתָן וּשְׁלִישִׁית אֲפִילוּ טֶפַח כָּשֵׁר. רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁל אַרְבָּעָה אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים וּשְׁלִישִׁית אֲפִילוּ טֶפַח כָּשֵׁר. וּבְמָבוֹי עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא מְגוּפָּף מֵאַרְבַּע רוּחוֹתָיו. רָחַב מֵעֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת סוּכָּה כְשֵׁרָה וּמָבוֹי פָסוּל. הִדְלָה עָלֶיהָ אֶת הַגֶּפֶן וְאֶת הַדְּלַעַת. הָדָא דְתֵימָא. עַל בֵּית סָאתַיִים. אֲבַל יְתִיר מִבֵּית סָאתַיִים נַעֲשִׂית כִּמְחִיצָה שֶׁהוּקְפָּה זְרָעִים. שֶׁאֵין מְטַלְטֵל בָּהּ אֶלָּא בְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. חַמָּתָהּ מְרוּבָּה מִצִּילָּתָהּ בַּסּוּכָּה פְסוּלָה וּבְמָבוֹי כָשֵׁר. סוּכָּה מְקוּרָה פְסוּלָה. מָבוֹי מְקוּרֶה כָשֵׁר. רִבִּי אִמִּי בְשֵׁם רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָה. לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר מְקוּרֶה. אֶלָּא נָתַן מְלַתֵרָא וְיֵשׁ בּוֹ רָחַב אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים. מַתֶּרֶת אֶת הַמָּבוֹי.HALAKHAH: “An alley which is higher than twenty,” etc. 1:1 (ס). Rebbi Yose said it without attribution, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rav: The rabbis inferred it from the door of the Sanctuary, but Rebbi Jehudah inferred it from the door of the Hall 6:2–3, 2Chr. 3:3–4) do not give measurements of the doors. Babli 2a.. An argument from the door of the Hall is sufficient only up to forty cubits, as we have stated there 3:4.: “The door of the Hall was forty cubits high and twenty cubits wide.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, even forty or fifty cubits; Bar Qappara stated, even a hundred cubits. Rebbi Abin said, Rebbi Jehudah follows his opinion and the rabbis follow their opinion, as we have stated there, “and similarly one carries under panelled bridges on the Sabbath, the words of Rebbi Jehudah, but the Sages forbid it.” As you are saying there, one considers the cross-beam as if it came down and closed, here also one considers the roof as if it came down and closed. This is the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah in the case of a sukkah, this is his opinion in the case of an alley. Also the opinion of the rabbis in the case of a sukkah is their opinion in the case of an alley. But they do not compare is accidental since the rules in both cases diverge widely.. There are items qualified for a sukkah which are disqualified for an alley and those qualified for an alley but disqualified for a sukkah. Double pointed stakes are qualified for a sukkah but disqualified for an alley, and it was stated thus: If he brought four double pointed stakes and thatched over them it is qualified as a sukkah by putting up four poles carrying a frame on which one thatches a roof on condition that the poles qualify as walls, i. e., each of them is at least 4 hand-breadths wide. Otherwise one would have to make makeshift walls between the poles as described in Mishnah 9. but disqualified for an alley. That is, if they are higher by more than three [hand-breadths] than the walls of the alley. But if they are not higher by more than three [hand-breadths] than the walls of the alley it is qualified. If they are not, but if they are four [hand-breadths] wide they are qualified even if arbitrarily high. Walls may be qualified for a sukkah but disqualified for an alley, and it was stated thus: “Two regular and the third even one hand-breadth is qualified 1:13. A sukkah must be at least 10 hand-breadths high and the sides have to be at least 7 hand-breadths wide..” Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Two of four hand-breadths each and the third even one hand-breadth is qualified. But for an alley only if it is closed in its four directions. Wider than ten cubits is qualified for a sukkah but disqualified for an alley. “If he drew a vine or squash. 1:4 or to Tosephta Eruvin 1:7; shortened to leave out all of the argument. The thatched roof of a sukkah must be vegetal material not connected to the ground. Therefore vine or squash are disqualified to be used for thatching. But a vine growing in an arch over the entrance of an alley is as good as a beam to mark the entrance.” That means, up to an area of two bet se’ah. But more than an area of two bet se’ah it is a partition made for agriculture where one may transport only four cubits. If its sunshine is more than its shadow it is disqualified as sukkah 1:1. Since alleys usually have no roof, they are not expected to provide shade. but qualified for an alley. A roofed sukkah is disqualified, a roofed alley is qualified is its makeshift thatched roof; it is not a sukkah if it has a waterproof roof. But if the entrance to an alley passes under a permanent roof at least 4 hand-breadths wide it does not need any other sign at the entrance. If the alley is open at both ends and one end is roofed, it is considered a dead-end alley. Cf. S. Liebermann, Tosephta ki-Fshutah part 3, p. 309, on Tosephta 1:7.. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rav Oshaia: Not only roofed, but if he put there a cross beam four hand-breadths wide, it makes the alley permitted.

רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי חִינְנָא בְשֵׁם כַּהֲנָא. [אֵין] הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוּדָה. דִּלֹא כֵן מָה אֲנָן אָמְרִין. רִבִּי יוּדָה וַחֲכָמִים תְּהֵא הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוּדָה. אֶלָּא בְגִין דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵי הַמֵּיקַל בְּהִילְכוֹת עֵירוּבִין. וְאָמַר רִבִּי נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. וּמַקְשִׁינָן עֲלֵיהּ. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵי הַמֵּיקַל בְּהִילְכוֹת עֵירוּבִין. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר נַחְמָן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. וְקַשְׁיָינָן עֲלֵהּ. סָבְרִין מֵימַר. יָחִיד אֶצֶל יָחִיד. הָא יָחִיד אֶצֶל חֲכָמִים לֹא. אָתָא רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי וַאֲפִילוּ חֲכָמִים הַחֲלוּקִין עָלָיו. וָכָא תָהֵא הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוּדָה וַאֲפִילוּ חֲכָמִים הַחֲלוּקִים עָלָיו. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. הֲלָכָה כְדִבְרֵי הַמֵּיקַל בְּעֵירוּבִין. אָמַר לֵיהּ רַב חִיָיה בַּר אַשִּׁי. כְּגוֹן הַהִיא דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. וְכֵן גְּשָׁרִים הַמְפוּלָּשִׁין מְטַלְטְלִין תַּחְתֵּיהֶן בַּשַּׁבָּת. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין. אָמַר לֵיהּ. לֹא עֵירוּבִין אָמַרְתִּי אֶלָּא מְחִיצוֹת. סָבַר כַּהֲנָא כְּהָדָא דִשְׁמוּאֵל. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרַךְ מֵימַר. אֵין הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוּדָה.to Eruvin Chapter 4 (col. 596–597 in the edition Jerusalem 1973); a parallel for the entire paragraph is in the Babli 46a. A defective copy (by the corrector) also is in Chapter 6, Note 33. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Cahana: Practice does [not] follow Rebbi Jehudah. If it were not so what would we say? Rebbi Jehudah versus the Sages, practice should follow Rebbi Jehudah? But since Rebbi Jacob bar Idi said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, practice follows the lenient opinion in Eruvin, and Rebbi Naḥman bar Isaac said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, practice follows Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri. (We asked about it, did not Rebbi Jacob bar Idi say in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, practice follows the lenient opinion in Eruvin, and Rav Naḥman bar Isaac said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, practice follows Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri.) We asked about it, we would think this refers to an individual versus an individual but not an individual versus the Sages. There came Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Jacob bar Idi said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, practice follows Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri even though the Sages disagree with him. Why should practice not follow Rebbi Jehudah even though the Sages disagree with him? Samuel said, practice follows the lenient opinion in Eruvin. Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said to him, for example what we have stated there, “and similarly one carries under panelled bridges on the Sabbath, the words of Rebbi Jehudah, but the Sages forbid it”? He told him, did I not say Eruvin but partitions a common domain into private domain but whether the space under a bridge automatically has the status of a permanent dwelling which does not need any eruv.? Cahana shares Samuel’s opinion one follows the lenient opinion but also that the principle does not apply to questions of partitions. In the matter of an alley he holds that turning it into a private domain needs two things, first the fixation of the entrance partition described in Mishnah 1:1 to which the principle does not apply, and the collection of an eruv as described in Chapter 2, to which the principle does apply.. Therefore it was necessary to say that practice does not follow Rebbi Jehudah.

לֹא אָמַר אֶלָּא לְמַעֲלָה מֵעֶשְׂרִים. הָא בְסוֹף עֶשְׂרִים כָּשֵׁר. וַתְיָיא כְרַב דְּרַב אָמַר. סוֹף שִׁיעוּרִן לְהָקֵל. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. סוֹף שִׁיעוּרִן לְהַחֲמִיר. רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מָבוֹי שֶׁקּוֹרָתוֹ לְמַעֲלָה מֵעֶשְׂרִים נוֹתֵֵן קוֹרָה בְתוֹךְ עֶשְׂרִים וּמְמַעֵט בְּתוֹךְ עֶשְׂרִים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. וְהוּא שֶׁיְּהֵא כָל הֶכְשֵׁר קוֹרָה בְתוֹךְ עֶשְׂרִים. רִבִּי חִלְקִיָּה אָמַר בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא. וַאֲפִילוּ כְרַב אַתְיָא הִיא. דְּרַב אָמַר. שְׁחִיטָה מֶחֱצָה לְמֶחֱצָה כְשֵׁירָה. וְלָמָּה אָמְרוּ. פְסוּלָה. מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן. שֶׁאִם תֵּימַר שֶׁיִּתֵּן בְּתוֹךְ עֶשְׂרִים. אַף הוּא נוֹתֵן לְמַעֲלָה מֵעֶשְׂרִים.They only said “higher than twenty”. Therefor at the end of twenty it is qualified. This follows Rav who said that the end of measurements is for leniency; Rebbi Joḥanan said that the end of measurements is for restriction is qualified up to a limit a is read by Rav as “x less or equal to whereas R. Joḥanan reads it as “x strictly less than a”. In the Babli, 3a (last line), the position of Rav is represented by the Babylonian Rava, that of R. Joḥanan by the Galilean Ulla.. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: For an alley whose beam is higher than twenty he puts another beam within twenty and this reduces to less than twenty. Rebbi Yose said, on condition that the entire qualification beam be within twenty. Rebbi Ḥilqiah said in the name of Rebbi Aḥa, even this comes following Rav, as Rav said that slaughter half by half is qualified, and why did they say that it is disqualified? Because of the visual impression 29a.. For if you say that he has to put it within twenty, he would put it higher than twenty.

יְמַעֵט. כֵּיצַד יְמַעֵט. עוֹשֶׂה אִיסְטַּבָּה עַל פֶּתַח הַמָּבוֹי וּמַתִּיר הַמָּבוֹי. כַּמָּה יְהֵא בָהּ. רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים כְּדֵי מָבוֹי. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר. טֶפַח כְּדֵי קוֹרָה. חֲבֵרַיָיא אָמְרִין. כָּל שֶׂהוּ. הֲרֵי אֵין כָּאן גּוֹבָה עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה עַל רוֹחָב טֶפַח.“It should be reduced.” How does one reduce? He makes a platform at the entrance of the alley and permits the alley. How much must it be? Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: Four hand-breadths for an alley to Eruvin, first paragraph) reads: כדי מקים “as a space”, an expression also used in the next paragraph. An area of four by four hand-breadths is a space for itself; cf. Mishnah Šabbat 11:3. Babli 10a, top.. Rebbi Yose says, one hand-breadth corresponding to the beam. The colleagues say, anything, since here is no longer a height of twenty cubits in the widths of a hand-breadth.

Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin.1.1