Eruvin 77b (עז:) — the Talmud in English

At the time

when some of their leaves

are

exposed, one need not be concerned

[and even if some of the leaves are covered], [Rashi, Shabbat 113a; see also Rashi, Shabbat 50b],

either on account of forbidden mixtures

in a vineyard

or on account of tithe,

since they are not rooted in the ground.

That is: If the turnips and radishes had been tithed, there is no need for concern [even if some of their leaves are not exposed], lest they have taken root and the additional growth has become obligated in tithe, for certainly they have not taken root.

Nor on account of

the prohibition against planting during

the Sabbatical year.

And

they may be removed—

the turnips and radishes, if some of their leaves are exposed—by means of the leaves

on Shabbat.

[The beraita mentioned “when some of the leaves are exposed” specifically with regard to Shabbat, since with regard to forbidden mixtures, tithe, and the Sabbatical year, in either case one need not be concerned.]

We see, then, that they may be removed on Shabbat even though they are concealed in the ground, and we are not concerned that one might dig. The same should apply to a basin with rims: It should be permitted [Ritba]. If so, how can the basin diminish the wall’s height?!

And we answer:

It is necessary;

the statement that a basin diminishes the wall refers only to a case where it was firmly attached with mortar to the ground, so that it cannot be pulled away by hand, but

requires a hoe

[a mattock]

and a hatchet

[a type of ax], [Shulchan Arukh and Mishna Berura].

For in such a case it is forbidden to remove it on Shabbat, and it is therefore an object that may not be removed on Shabbat!

If one leaned against the wall—which was ten handbreadths high—in one courtyard

an Egyptian ladder

[a small ladder that is easy to move], in order to ascend by means of it and use the wall comfortably,

it does not diminish!

That is: The wall is not considered as though its height had been diminished, making it comfortable to use.

And

a ladder

of Tyrian construction

[which is large and heavy]

does diminish,

as the reason is explained shortly! [See illustration]

And we explain it:

What are the circumstances of an Egyptian ladder?

The scholars of the house of Rabbi Yannai say: Any

ladder that is so small

that it has fewer than four rungs

[steps].

Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: What is the reason that an Egyptian ladder does not diminish?

He said to him:

But

have you not heard this statement that Rav Aḥa bar Adda said that Rav Hamnuna said that Rav said: Because it is an object that may be removed on Shabbat, and any object that may be removed on Shabbat does not diminish!

And we wonder:

If so, even a Tyrian ladder as well

is an object that may be removed on Shabbat; so why does it diminish?!

And we answer:

There,

in the case of a Tyrian ladder, which is heavy,

its weight fixes it in place.

Since it is heavy, people do not remove it from there, and it is considered as though it were fixed in the ground; therefore, it diminishes! We establish that the ladder has the status of an “opening,” which serves to make the halakha more lenient [above, page 59b].

Accordingly: In the case of two courtyards with a partition between them, just as if there were an opening between them, the inhabitants may choose to establish two eruvs, or may choose to establish one, so too when there is a ladder on both sides of the wall, they may choose to establish one eruv, or may choose to establish two, because a ladder is considered like an opening.

Abaye said: A wall between two courtyards that is ten handbreadths high

the measure of a partition,

and one placed a ladder four handbreadths wide

handbreadths

on this side,

and

a ladder four handbreadths wide

handbreadths

on this side,

even though the ladders are not aligned directly opposite one another,

if

there are fewer than three

handbreadths between them, for the principle of lavud applies [Rabbeinu Ḥananel]—

it diminishes! [See illustration 1]

That is: We rule leniently and treat the two courtyards as though there were no wall between them, and they may establish one eruv together.

That is: As a leniency, the two courtyards are treated as though there were no wall between them, and they may establish one shared eruv.

But if there were

three

handbreadths between one ladder and the other, it is not considered an opening, and

it does not diminish,

since one cannot pass from one courtyard to the other.

And we said

that if there are three handbreadths between them it is not considered an opening

only when the wall is not

wide

four

handbreadths wide.

But

if

the

a

wall is

is wide

four

handbreadths wide,

even if each ladder is far

from the other

by a great deal, it is still an opening, since one ascends by means of the ladder to the top of the wall and walks along its top until reaching the ladder on the other side of the wall. But when it is not four handbreadths wide, it is not comfortable to walk along the wall.

Rav Bivi bar Abaye said: If one built

in one courtyard, alongside a wall—in order that it would be comfortable for the inhabitants of that courtyard to use the wall, and they could use it on Shabbat—

a wooden

platform

with legs, which stands

on top of another platform,

with air separating between them. [See illustration 2]

If the lower platform is four

handbreadths [along the length of the wall], and it alone is sufficient to diminish the wall, as, for example, when the height between it and the top of the wall is less than ten handbreadths, it

diminishes

the wall’s height, and the inhabitants of this courtyard are permitted to use the wall.

Because we say: Remove the upper platform from here, and let the lower platform alone diminish the wall.

Alternatively

[or also, if] even if

the lower platform does not have

a length of

four

handbreadths, so that it is not itself fit to diminish the wall,

but if

the upper platform has

a length of

four

handbreadths, and

there are not three

[between one platform and the other]

handbreadths

between them, since we apply the principle of “lavud” and they become like a single platform standing on the ground, it

diminishes

[even though the upper platform is found to slope gradually until it is less than four handbreadths]!

But if there are three handbreadths between one platform and the other, since the lower one is not fit to diminish the wall, while the upper one does not stand on the ground, this is a diminution in the air, and a diminution in the air is not considered a diminution.

And Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuha said: In the case of a ladder whose rungs project

[like our ladders, in which there is air between the rungs; this is what is meant by “project,” that they project one over the other in the air, and there are also ladders made like our staircases], and one placed it alongside a wall to make its use comfortable,

if the lower rung is

four

handbreadths

wide, and there are not ten handbreadths between it and the top of the wall, and there are not three handbreadths between it and the ground, for the principle of lavud applies [Shulchan Arukh], it

diminishes.

Alternatively

[or also, if] even if

the lower rung is not four

handbreadths,

and the upper rung is four

handbreadths,

and there are not three

[between one rung and the other]

handbreadths, since the principle of lavud applies, it

diminishes,

as in the case stated above concerning one platform on top of another. [See illustration 1]

And Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuha:

And Rav Naḥman said in the name of Rabba bar Avuha: