Eruvin 33a — the Talmud in English

and he intended to establish his residence at its base

of a tree in the public domain.

And it follows that the eruv is placed beyond the four cubits that belong to anyone who places his eruv [for the four cubits that are given to him as though enclosed by partitions are in the place of his residence, and not in the place of his eruv].

And therefore: if he placed it on the branch above ten handbreadths, so that he cannot bring it to the place of his residence, for if he were to lower it below, he would be one who carries out from the private domain into the public domain, it is not an eruv.

But when the eruv is below ten handbreadths, and is not in the private domain, he can bring it to the base of the tree by lowering it below into the public domain, and bring it to the place of his residence by carrying it less than four cubits at a time, and it is an eruv.

And we raise a difficulty concerning what we said, that the eruv is on the branch:

And what is “above,” and what is “below”?!

For since the eruv is on the branch, which extends sideways in an even manner, if so, “above” means when the branch is high, and “below” means when the branch is low; and if so, he should have taught “high and low,” and not “above and below.” For this expression applies only to an upright thing that has an upper part and a lower part.

And we explain: Indeed, the branch extends entirely sideways, but sometimes, at the end of its extension—

it becomes upright,

it rises upward.

And here we are dealing with a case in which the branch’s sideways extension was below ten handbreadths, and after four cubits the branch became upright and rose to above ten handbreadths.

And therefore, if he placed it on its extension, or at the beginning of its rising, below ten handbreadths, this is placement “below.” And if he placed it above, on its upright part, above ten handbreadths, this is “above.”

And we raise a difficulty: Even if he placed it above ten handbreadths, let it be an eruv.

For although he cannot bring it to its base if he lowers it from the place where the eruv is to below, which would make him one who carries out from the private domain into the public domain, nevertheless:

But if he wishes, he can bring it

bring it to his eruv

by way of it [

that he should first take it from the place where it is [above ten handbreadths on the tree, which is a private domain], and bring it by way of the branches of the tree, at the place of the branch’s extension [where this is not a private domain, since it is not ten handbreadths high, and it is not a public domain], without lowering it below, until opposite the base of the tree.

And there, the place opposite the base of the tree is one domain with the place of his residence below. For since the one establishing the eruv has around the place of his residence, at the base of the tree, four cubits, and they are considered like a private domain, and it rises to the firmament, the matter is considered as though he and his eruv are in one place, and his eruv should acquire [his residence] for him?!

And we answer: Here we are dealing

when

at the place of its extension—

many people carry burdens on it [

the people of the public domain arrange the loads on their shoulders at the place of the tree’s extension], so that there it is a public domain.

And it is as Ulla [said].

For Ulla said: A pillar

high

nine

handbreadths that is

in the public domain, and many people carry burdens on it, and one threw

an object from a distance of four cubits in the public domain,

and it came to rest upon it—

he is liable,

for this is one who transfers four cubits in the public domain and places [the object] in the public domain. [

But if they were not carrying burdens on it, it would be a “place of exemption” if it were not four handbreadths wide, and if it were four handbreadths wide, it would be a karmelit].

And since this is so, he cannot bring the eruv by way of the extension, for he would be carrying out from the private domain [where his eruv is placed] into the public domain.

And Rashi added: He also cannot bring it through the air of that place to opposite the place of the base, because this would be one who “extends” from a private domain to a private domain through the air of the public domain, which is prohibited even if he extends it above ten handbreadths from the public domain itself [and even though above ten handbreadths it is not a public domain], as explained in Shabbat, page 96.

And now we explain:

What is Rabbi’s [opinion]

who said: Concerning something that is due to shevut, they did not decree during twilight—and

what is the [opinion of the] Sages?

For it was taught: If they gave

for the eruv

on a tree,

if they gave it

above ten handbreadths, his eruv is not an eruv. Below ten handbreadths, his eruv is an eruv,

as we explained it above.

And it is forbidden to take it

from the tree, for this is use of a tree, which is forbidden due to shevut.

And nevertheless, it is an eruv, for concerning every shevut they did not decree during twilight.

But if it was

within three

handbreadths, adjacent to the ground,

it is permitted to take it,

for concerning everything below three handbreadths, even with a tree they did not decree, since it is like solid ground, as we learned below, page 99.

And if

they gave

for the eruv

in a basket [

a basket]

and hung it on a tree [

from the side, and the opening of the basket was level with the top of the tree, while its bottom was three handbreadths distant from the top of the tree, as is the manner of hanging baskets on a tree, Tosafot and the Ritba]—

even if

they gave the eruv in a basket that was

above ten handbreadths—

his eruv is an eruv, the words of Rabbi.

And we explain it shortly.

And the Sages say: Every place from which it is forbidden to take it

the eruv

his eruv is not an eruv,

as it will explain it and proceed to explain concerning what they disagree.

In any event, the reasoning of the Sages is: Since it is forbidden to take it—even though it is only a shevut—they decreed concerning it during twilight, whereas Rabbi permits.

This is Rabbi, and this is the Sages.

And we inquire concerning it: This that we learned,

“And the Sages say” \-

to what [

do the words of the Sages refer?

If you say that it refers to the latter clause,

where Rabbi says that if they gave it in a basket, even above ten handbreadths, his eruv is an eruv; and concerning this the Sages disagree and hold that since it is forbidden to take it from there—for this is use of a tree—it is not an eruv.

This cannot be said.

For is it possible to

say

that

the Sages hold

that although “he does not use the tree itself [when taking it from there], but uses the basket, which is the sides of the tree” [Rashi’s wording. And Rav Hai wrote: “The basket hanging on the tree is at the sides of the tree”], even so it is forbidden to take it from there, since also

the sides

of the tree

are forbidden

for use on Shabbat?!

If so, there would be support from here for the one who holds in Shabbat, page 154b, that even the sides of a tree are forbidden, and as we ruled in Shabbat there [and see in the passage there what is called “sides”]”.

Rather,

the Sages

[refer] to the first clause

it is concerning which they disagree.

For it teaches there: Below ten handbreadths, his eruv is an eruv, and it is forbidden to take it. And concerning this the Sages disagree and hold that since it is forbidden to take it—even though it is due to shevut—it is not an eruv. For they decreed that it is forbidden to take it even during twilight, which is a time of uncertainty.

And now we explain the first clause of the beraita:

This tree—

with which the beraita is dealing here—

what are its circumstances?

If it does not have

a width of

four

handbreadths at the top of the tree, this is difficult: Why is the eruv not an eruv when he gave it above ten, on account of his being one who carries out from the private domain into the public domain, as we said? But since it is not four handbreadths wide, it is not a private domain, but a place of exemption [for from a height of three handbreadths above the ground, it is a place of exemption when it is not four handbreadths wide].

And if it has

at the top of the tree

four

handbreadths, so that above ten handbreadths it is a private domain—

when they gave

for the eruv

in a basket, what is [the law]?!

For the basket hanging at the sides of the tree has the status of the “holes of a private domain,” since the opening of the basket reaches the top of the tree, and it is forbidden to carry out from it into the public domain; and why is it an eruv?! [Tosafot].

[He] said

explaining it

Ravina:

The first clause,

where we say that if they gave it on a tree above ten handbreadths, his eruv is not an eruv, because the eruv stands in a private domain, is dealing

with [a case where] there is

in the tree itself a width of

four

handbreadths. And when it is at a height of ten, it is forbidden to carry it out from there, and therefore it is not an eruv.

But

the latter clause,

where we say in it that if they gave it in a basket, it is permitted, is dealing

with [a case where] there is not

in the tree

four

handbreadths in the width of the tree itself, but the

basket

is what

completes it to four.

That is to say: the thickness of the tree in its middle together with the area of the bottom of the basket join to make an area of four handbreadths. Now the basket does not have the status of the “holes of a private domain,” since the tree itself is not a private domain, and consequently it has no holes.

And one also cannot give the tree together with the basket—which together are four handbreadths wide—the status of a private domain, since beneath the basket there is no width of four handbreadths. And in any such case this is not a private domain. And therefore it is properly an eruv, since there is no prohibition from the Torah against carrying out from the basket to the place of his residence in the public domain.

And since Rabbi stated that if the eruv is placed in a basket it is acceptable, and did not say that if the eruv is placed on a tree that is four handbreadths wide at its height, while at the bottom of the tree it is not four handbreadths wide, it is an eruv, it necessarily follows that he came to teach us some novelty in this matter [Tosafot].