Eruvin 59a — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

And we raised a difficulty concerning this: Is it so that only

where he increased -

yes,

measure there, whereas

where he decreased -

no,

do they not measure?

But a smaller place is included within a larger place!

And we answer:

Say: even where he increased

they measure.

We learned in the Mishna:

He increased for one and decreased for one.

And we raised a difficulty concerning this:

Why do I need this additionally?

It is the same thing!

For there is no difference between increasing for one and increasing for one place.

And we answer:

This is what he is saying:

If it happened that he

increased,

he measures

one, and decreased,

he measures

one -

we heed

the measurer,

this one who increased.

Abaye said: Provided that he does not increase beyond the measure of the city diagonally.

We learned in the Mishna:

The Sages said the matter only to be lenient, not to be stringent.

And we object:

But it was taught

the opposite:

The Sages said the matter not to be lenient, but to be stringent!?

Ravina said:

This is what the tanna in the

beraita is saying: When the Sages instituted the laws of Shabbat boundaries, they came

not to be lenient concerning words of Torah,

since Shabbat boundaries are not מן התורה.

Rather,

they issued a decree in order

to be stringent concerning words of Torah.

And

since

the laws of Shabbat boundaries are rabbinic,

therefore we proceed leniently.

Mishna:

Once the Sages instituted courtyard eruvin and the joining of alleyways, and the people became accustomed to carrying from houses to a courtyard and from a courtyard to an alleyway, the Sages feared that the law of the public domain would be forgotten by the people. Therefore, they instituted that a city containing six hundred thousand people should not be joined in one eruv, but rather one neighborhood should be left apart, so that it would not be joined with the entire city, and it would be forbidden to carry from it to the rest of the city, and from the rest of the city to it, and through this a remembrance of the law of the public domain would remain.

A city belonging to one individual,

into which six hundred thousand people did not enter regularly,

and

now

becomes one belonging to many -

one may join all of it,

as before. And its alleyways do not require a correction.

And this is provided that there is not within it an actual public domain, such as when the streets are not sixteen cubits wide. But if there is a public domain מן התורה within it, its correction will be explained in the Gemara.

And

a city that was

one belonging to many, and becomes one belonging to one individual,

because its dwellings became fewer, even though it does not contain a complete public domain,

one may not join all of it.

Unless he made outside it

“remnants” that are not joined with the city but separately.

And these remnants must be left in the measure of

a city

called

“Hadashah,” which is in Judea and contains fifty dwellings, the words of Rabbi Judah.

Rabbi Shimon says:

It is sufficient to leave

three courtyards, each of two houses.

Gemara:

And we raised a difficulty concerning this:

What are the circumstances of a city belonging to one individual that becomes one belonging to many?

Rav Judah said: For example, the city of the Exilarch.

Rav Nahman said to him: What is the reason

you brought specifically the city of the Exilarch as an example?

If you say because many people are found

together

with the ruler

beside the Exilarch, the ruler, and therefore they did not fear there lest the law of the public domain be forgotten, since the many people who gather beside the Exilarch

remind one another,

they will remind one another that the permission to join applies only to a city belonging to one individual that becomes one belonging to many, and not to a city belonging to many that is one belonging to many.

But

all

the cities of

Israel also -

on Shabbat morning

in the morning of Shabbat

are found together with one another,

as they are all present together to hear the rabbi’s sermon, and they will remind one another.

Rather, Rav Nahman said:

In every city belonging to one individual that becomes one belonging to many, it is permitted to join. And

such as the city

the great city

of Natzovai,

belonging to a man named Natzovai, and not specifically the city of the Exilarch.

The Sages taught: A city belonging to one individual that becomes one belonging to many, and a public domain

sixteen cubits wide

passes through it -

how does one join it?

Below, they establish this beraita as the view of Rabbi Judah, who holds that a public domain having two partitions on its sides is considered a private domain, and it can be joined by

making a side-post here

and a side-post here,

on its two sides that remained open.

Or a crossbeam here and a crossbeam here.

And he carries and gives in the middle,

the public domain, which from now is a private domain, corrected with the corrections of alleyways appropriate for a private domain.

But in a city belonging to many that is one belonging to many, they did not permit correcting the open alleyways, which are a public domain, by means of a side-post and a crossbeam alone, until he makes for them either a form of a doorway or a door here and a side-post here.

And one does not join it by halves,

several alleyways together, but rather joins all of them.

Since initially, when it was one belonging to one individual, all its alleyways were considered as one, and all its people would walk through all its alleyways.

And once the city grew and the residents increased, if several alleyways join separately for themselves, and the other alleyways also join separately for themselves, the matter will be considered as though some of the inhabitants of the alleyway did not participate in the eruv, and through this they prohibit all the residents from carrying in the alleyway.

Rather: either

they join

all of it.

Or

they join

each alleyway separately.

And below it will be explained what correction this is.