Bava Batra 11b — the Talmud in English

But if he designates an opening for it,

if he had an opening in the house that was adjacent to the pit, and through this opening he would throw the kernels and take them, in this case

he has only four cubits in front of his opening,

and he does not have four cubits on every side. For he is accustomed to approach this pit through the opening, and just as a person has only four cubits in his house opposite the entrance to the house, so he has only four cubits opposite the opening through which he goes out to that pit.

Rav Huna said: A portico

a house that has no walls, and whose roof rests upon four pillars

does not have four cubits

in front of it in the courtyard. And the Gemara explains: for

what is the reason

what is the reason they said that the four cubits opposite the entrance to the house belong to the homeowner?

Because of unloading his burden,

so that he can unload his burden within those four cubits and bring it into the house, for he cannot bring the donkey with its burden into the house. But

here,

in the case of a portico,

it is possible that he can bring it inside,

he can bring the donkey into the portico, since it has no walls,

and

there

he unloads

his burden. It follows that he has no need for four cubits opposite the portico.

Rav Sheshet raised an objection,

we learned in a baraita:

both the entrances of houses and the entrances of porticoes have four cubits

in the courtyard opposite the entrance to the house. It is thus stated explicitly in this baraita that the owner of the portico has four cubits in the courtyard.

And we answer:

when that was taught

what we learned in the baraita, that a portico also has four cubits in the courtyard, this applies only

to a portico of the house of the teacher

This portico has walls, except that these walls are surrounded by windows, and therefore it is called “a portico” , and the owner of this portico has four cubits in the courtyard so that he can unload his burden there.

And we raise a difficulty: is it not obvious that in

a portico of the house of the teacher

the owner of that portico has four cubits in the courtyard, for

a room

is a proper one

this is a complete room, and its law is like that of any house in the courtyard, where the homeowner has four cubits in the courtyard opposite the entrance to the house—

Rather,

what is stated in the baraita, that the owner of the portico has four cubits in the courtyard, refers

to a Roman portico

a house surrounded by low walls that do not reach the ceiling, and concerning this the baraita teaches something new: that the owner of this portico has four cubits in the courtyard. But a portico that has no walls at all does not grant its owner four cubits in the courtyard.

The Sages taught: A gatehouse,

a small house made at the entrance of a reception hall, and likewise

a portico, and

likewise

a balcony

from which one enters the upper story—

they have

for the owner of the gatehouse and for the owners of the portico and balcony

four cubits

in the courtyard or on the balcony opposite the entrance to the house.

If there were five

houses opening onto a balcony,

such that several upper stories opened into the balcony—that is, the owners of the upper stories climbed by a ladder to the balcony, and from there each entered his own upper story—

they have no

in the balcony

more than four cubits בלבד

for all of them together. And we do not say that each one of them has four cubits in the balcony, for all of them ascend and descend by the ladder, and they need only four cubits around the ladder.

Rabbi Yohanan asked Rabbi Yannai,

one who has

a chicken coop

and the opening of the coop faces the courtyard—does he

have four cubits

in the courtyard opposite the opening of the coop,

or does he not have four cubits?

He said to him: What is the reason

what is the reason the Sages said that the homeowner has four cubits opposite the entrance to the courtyard? It is only

because of unloading his burden,

so that he can unload the burden from the donkey within those four cubits and bring the burden into the house. But

here,

in the case of a chicken coop, there is no need for four cubits in order to bring in the chickens, since the chicken

climbs and goes up

to the top of the coop and from there enters the coop, and when it wishes to leave it

climbs

to the top of the coop

and descends

outside it. Therefore the owner of the coop has no four cubits in the courtyard.

Rava asked Rav Nahman: A house

that

half of it is roofed and half of it is not roofed,

and the entrance to the house faces the courtyard—does he

have

the homeowner

four cubits

in the courtyard opposite the entrance to the house,

or does he not have four cubits—

He said to him: He does not have four cubits!

For

it is not necessary

to say that if

its roofing is on the inside,

the roofed section is inner—that is, the outer side facing the courtyard, where the entrance to the house is, was not roofed, whereas the inner side was roofed—in that case certainly the homeowner does not have four cubits in the courtyard,

for it is possible that he can enter inside and unload

for he can enter with the donkey through the roofed section into the unroofed section of the house and unload his burden there [for the entire reason they granted four cubits in the courtyard is that it is not customary to unload the donkey’s burden in the house because of the utensils in the house, but here he can enter, since it is not customary to place utensils in the unroofed section].

Rather, even if its roofing is toward the outside,

that is, the outer side where the entrance to the house is, is roofed, even in this case they did not grant him four cubits in the courtyard, since

it is possible that he can enter inside

he can turn the donkey toward the unroofed section of the house,

and

there

he unloads

the burden from the donkey.

Rav Huna asked Rav

Ami:

one of the members of an alleyway

an alleyway is a narrow lane, and the entrances of several courtyards open onto the alleyway, and one of the members of the alleyway had his entrance facing the alleyway,

who sought to turn his entrance to another alleyway,

he wished to open a new entrance on the other side of his house, which faced another alleyway— do the

members of

the

alleyway

the second

prevent him

from opening an entrance into their alleyway,

or do they not prevent him?

He said to him: The members of the alleyway prevent him!

For until now the owner of that house had no right to pass through their alleyway, whereas if he opens an entrance, he will pass there.

Rav Huna further asked Rav Ami:

Guest lodging

the king’s army that came to the city, and it is incumbent upon the townspeople to provide lodging for them—how is it divided? Is it

divided according to the number of people,

so that a house containing many people is obligated to provide lodging for more soldiers,

or is it divided according to the number of entrances,

that is, one who has many entrances to his house must take more soldiers into his house?

He said to him: It is divided according to the number of people!

It was taught likewise

and thus we learned in a baraita—

manure that

is produced

in the courtyard

because the owners of the houses threw manure from their houses into the courtyard, that manure

is divided according to the number of entrances,

and one who has more entrances takes more manure, for since he has more entrances, presumably he threw more manure.

Guest lodging

the king’s army that came to the city, and it is incumbent upon the townspeople to provide lodging for them.

According to the number of people,

that is, a house containing more people is obligated to take more soldiers into its house.

Rav Huna said: One of the members of an alleyway

whose house entrance faces the alleyway,

who sought to close off the area opposite his entrance,

to enclose with a partition those four cubits that he has in the alleyway opposite the entrance to his house [for just as we learned above that the homeowner has four cubits in the courtyard opposite the entrance to his house, so too he has four cubits in the alleyway opposite the entrance to his house]—

the members of the alleyway prevent him

from enclosing his four cubits with a partition,

for

through this

he increases the path for them,

because when they walk through the alleyway, they must go around his partition and walk around it.

He raised an objection—

an objection to Rav Huna, who said that the members of the alleyway prevent the homeowner from enclosing his four cubits in the alleyway with a partition.

We learned in a baraita—

five courtyards

adjacent to one another that

open onto an alleyway,

where the entrance of each of the courtyards faces the alleyway, and the alleyway is closed on three sides, so that it is possible to exit it only through one side—

all of them use

the area of the alleyway adjacent to the entrance, together

with

the

outer

courtyard, which is adjacent to the entrance of the alleyway; and the owner of the outer courtyard cannot prevent them from passing adjacent to his courtyard, for all of them have a right to pass through this part of the alleyway in order to leave it.

And

also

the outer courtyard uses for itself

that same area, but it has no right to the other, inner parts of the alleyway.

And the others,

the inner courtyards,

use

the part of the alleyway adjacent to the second courtyard

with

the owner of

the second

courtyard, for they have a right to pass there toward the entrance of the alleyway.

And the second uses for itself

that same area together with the members of the inner courtyards,

and

likewise

uses

the owner of the second courtyard

with the outer courtyard

in the part of the alleyway adjacent to the outer courtyard—

It follows that

the

innermost courtyard uses for itself

alone the part of the alleyway adjacent to it, for none of the members of the courtyards has a right to that part of the alleyway,

and

in addition

uses together with each and every one

the parts of the alleyway adjacent to each and every courtyard, for on his way to the entrance he passes by all the other courtyards—

This is difficult for Rav Huna, who said: the householders always prevent their fellow from enclosing his four cubits with a partition; and even the householders adjacent to the entrance of the alleyway prevent the inner householder from enclosing his four cubits in the alleyway with a partition. Yet here we learned that those adjacent to the entrance of the alleyway have no right to the inner part of the alleyway.

And we answer:

It is a dispute between tannaim.

This law is subject to a dispute between tannaim. Although it is explained in the beraita that the residents of the outer courtyards have no right to the inner parts of the alleyway, this is not difficult for Rav Huna, because another tanna holds in accordance with his view—

For it was taught:

whose house entrance opened onto an alleyway,

that he sought to return his entrance to another alleyway,

he wished to open a new entrance on the other side of his house, which faced another alleyway,

the residents of the alleyway can prevent him,

for until now the owner of that house had no right to pass through their alleyway, whereas if he opens an entrance, he will be able to pass there. And if he

had

previously had an entrance opening onto that alleyway, but this entrance had been

closed,

for the householder had closed it,

and

after some time

sought

again

to open it,

in such a case,

the residents of the alleyway cannot prevent him—

the words of Rabbi.

And the beraita continues:

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: The five courtyards that open onto an alleyway all

the owners of the courtyards

use

the entire

alleyway with one another,

and the owner of the outer courtyard adjacent to the entrance of the alleyway has the right to use the inner part of the alleyway as well—

And the Gemara wonders:

“Courtyards”—who mentioned them?

To what do the words of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar refer? After all, this law was not mentioned at all in this beraita.

And we answer:

The beraita is deficient,

the words of the beraita before us are missing,

and this is what it teaches:

and this is how it should be read—

And likewise, the five courtyards that open onto an alleyway all use with the outer one, and the outer one uses for itself, and so forth.

As we learned above, that the owner of the outer courtyard has no right to the inner parts of the alleyway—

the words of Rabbi.

And concerning this the beraita continues—

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: The five courtyards that open onto an alleyway all use the alleyway,

and the owner of the outer courtyard adjacent to the entrance of the alleyway has the right to use the inner part of the alleyway as well—

Thus, the tannaim disputed whether the owner of the outer courtyard has a right to the inner parts of the alleyway, and Rav Huna’s words are in accordance with the view of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar:

The master said—

we learned in the beraita: if the householder wished to open an entrance onto another alleyway, the residents of the alleyway can prevent him from opening it; but if it

had been closed,

meaning that there had previously been an entrance, but the householder had closed it,

and

after some time

sought

again

to open it, the residents of the alleyway cannot prevent him!

Rava said: They taught this

in the beraita, that if the householder closed the entrance and then again sought to open it, the residents of the public domain cannot prevent him,

only

in a situation

where,

when he closed the entrance, the householder

did not break down its doorposts

he did not remove the lintel, the doorposts, or the threshold of the door. For by this he demonstrated that he had not removed his intention from that entrance and that he would ultimately open it.

But

if, when he closed the door, he

broke down its doorposts,

then

the residents of the alleyway can prevent him

from opening the entrance again, because once he closed the entrance and removed its doorposts, it is like a sealed wall; and when he comes to reopen the entrance, it is as though he is opening it for the first time, and the residents of the alleyway prevent him.

Abaye said to Rava: A beraita supports you,

that the entrance is not considered sealed unless he broke down its doorposts.