Eruvin 26a — the Talmud in English

Rava went

Rava went

and removed them,

he pulled the reeds out of their places, for he held that this was not necessary: since he had built there that pavilion, which is a dwelling, the entire orchard automatically became like a courtyard for that pavilion and was considered enclosed for dwelling purposes [as we said above [page 24a], “An opening permits it”].

And furthermore

went

they

Rav Pappa and Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua took them from behind him

they took the reeds from there, so that Rav Huna bar Hinnana would not return and fix them, for they held like Rava.

The next day

on Shabbat, when they wanted to eat and stroll in the orchard,

Ravina raised an objection to Rava

who held that there was no need for Rav Huna’s arrangement, even though the pavilion had been built there after the orchard had been enclosed:

One who spends Shabbat eve within a city that has a wall—the entire city up to the wall is considered for him like four cubits, which are the place of every person’s Shabbat residence—and he measures two thousand cubits from outside the wall; this is his Shabbat limit.

And if it did not have a wall, he measures two thousand cubits from the outermost houses of the city.

Shabbat

a new city

as it explains and proceeds

is measured from its settled area

from the inhabited houses, and not from its wall,

and

a city

that is old

is measured

from its wall.

Which is a new one and which is an old one?

A new one: one that was enclosed

by a wall

and was settled afterward

the city was settled with dwellings [for its wall is not considered a wall to make the whole of it like four cubits, since its settlement is “new,” as its wall preceded its settlement; the wording of Rashi].

An old one:

that

was settled

with dwellings

and was enclosed afterward.

And this

orchard

also,

which had already been enclosed many days earlier, while this pavilion was now being built, and the enclosure of the orchard had not been made with this dwelling in mind,

is like

a city that

was enclosed and was settled afterward, is it not!

And Rav Pappa too, for at first it had been obvious to him that the law was like Rava, and he even went and performed an action, retracted, and

Rav Pappa said to Rava: But Rav Asi said: The partitions of builders

builders’ partitions, which they make in order to eat there temporarily

are not called a partition,

for they are not considered enclosed for dwelling purposes.

Apparently, since it is made

merely

for privacy,

and on the next day they dismantle it,

it is not a partition.

Here too—

the partitions of the pavilion—

since it is made

merely for privacy [to eat there temporarily and occasionally, and for privacy so that they would not be seen from outside when they sit there—the Ritva]

it is not a partition,

and the pavilion itself is not enclosed for dwelling purposes, and certainly it cannot permit the entire orchard.

And Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua also retracted, and

Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua said to Rava: But Rav Huna said: A partition made for storing

not in order to dwell there, but in order to protect what they would “place” there

is not called a partition,

and this pavilion too, which was made only to place there their garments and prayer shawls that they remove there, and their other implements of use, is not a partition and is not enclosed for dwelling purposes.

For indeed, Rabbah bar Avuha

was

establishing an eruv for all of it

for the entire city

Mehoza, quarter by quarter,

neighborhood by neighborhood, and he did not establish one eruv for the entire city.

And although all the passageways of the city that opened toward the edge of the city were closed by partitions, nevertheless Mehoza was not considered one city enclosed by a wall [which could establish one eruv among all its residents]

because of the pits

the excavations in the form of trenches [pir means a trench] that separated the neighborhoods

of the oxen

intended to store in them kernels as food for the oxen, for those excavations were deeper than ten handbreadths.

And the partitions at the entrances of the passageways were of no avail to make all the neighborhoods one place, since those partitions were intended to protect the kernels in the excavations and not for the purpose of dwelling.

And these pits of the oxen—

are comparable to a partition made for storing

which is ineffective.

The Exilarch called out concerning them,

concerning Rav Pappa and Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua, who had not remembered yesterday that Rav Huna bar Hinnana’s repair was necessary, and had prevented him from returning and making the repair, while now they had become sages to prohibit:

“They are wise to do evil, but to do good they do not know”

yesterday.

We learned in the Mishna:

Rav Ela’i said: I heard from Rabbi Eliezer

that one may enclose not for the purpose of dwelling

even a bet kor:

And we said:

The Mishna—

which teaches that one may enclose only up to a bet kor [thirty beit seah]—

is not like Hanania

some explain: in the name of Rabbi Eliezer; and some explain: in his own name—the Ritva],

as it was taught in a beraita: Hanania says: Even if it is

a

forty-seah area, like the promenade of a king

the spacious area behind the palace.

Rabbi Yohanan said: And both of them,

Rabbi Ela’i and Hanania,

expounded one verse

for their positions:

As it is stated:

“In those days Hezekiah became mortally ill, and Isaiah son of Amoz the prophet came to him, and so forth.”

And Isaiah had not yet gone out

before he had managed to go out to

the middle courtyard

when the word of the Lord came to him, saying: Return and say to Hezekiah, and so forth: Behold, I shall heal you.

And in this verse there is a kri and a ktiv:

The written form: “the city”

the middle one,

and we read: “the courtyard”

the middle one [the inner one behind the palace]!

From here: the promenade of a king, which was

large

like medium-sized towns!

And since it is called a “courtyard,” which is ordinarily enclosed for dwelling purposes, even though in reality it was the spacious area behind the houses, which is not enclosed for dwelling purposes, they took from it a support that the entire measure has the status of a courtyard, so as to carry throughout it [the Ritva].

And

in what do these tannaim disagree

these tannaim?

One master holds: Medium-sized towns are a bet kor.

And one master holds: Forty

beit

seah are the measure.

And we interpret the verse:

And Isaiah

who was with Hezekiah [when he was ill]—

what did he want there?

That is to say: Why did he want to go out to the middle courtyard behind the house, which is not the ordinary route of exit?!

Rabbah bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: This teaches that Hezekiah became ill, and Isaiah went away from him

from him, with the intention

(and seated

to seat

the Gaon Yaakov]

a study session

of students engaging in Torah

at his entrance

inside the middle courtyard, so that the Angel of Death would not have permission to enter there [for words of Torah protect against the Angel of Death—the Ya’avetz. And similarly we find concerning David, whom the Angel of Death could not overcome while he was studying; see Shabbat, page 30].

And

from here: concerning a Torah scholar who became ill, they seat a study session at his entrance.

And we reject this:

It is not a matter

for us to seat a study session for every Torah scholar; rather, Isaiah did so because he was a prophet and a completely righteous man [the Ritva].

Perhaps the Satan will come to provoke him,

for when the Angel of Death sees that they are provoking him by not allowing him to enter, he provokes them [based on Rashi in the Ein Yaakov].

We learned in the Mishna:

And so I also heard from him: The members of a courtyard, one of whom forgot

among them

and did not establish an eruv,

and he renounced his authority to them,

his house

his own

is forbidden

for him to take out from it into the courtyard, but it is permitted for them:

And we were astonished:

But we learned: His house is forbidden for taking out and bringing in

both

for him and

both

for them?!

And we answer:

Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua said in the name of Rav Sheshet: It is not difficult: