Eruvin 85a (פה.) — the Talmud in English

A cistern

located in a small alley

between two courtyards [

which are not adjacent to one another; rather, a wall separates each courtyard from the small alley in which the cistern is located. The wall has no opening onto that alley, but only a window through which to draw water].

And if that cistern

is four

handbreadths

distant from the wall

of

this

courtyard

and four

handbreadths from the wall of this courtyard, and when the residents of each courtyard wish to draw water from the cistern, they must throw the vessel through the air across a distance of four handbreadths and draw water,

the strict law is that, since they use the cistern from a distance of four handbreadths, neither group prohibits the other from using the cistern and bringing water from it into the courtyard designated for each group, and from there into its house.

For a person does not prohibit another person when his use is through the air.

However, the Sages said that they should make a slight indication, so that they will not come to use another shared domain without an eruv.

Therefore:

this one projects

from his wall toward the cistern

a projection

of

any size

as an indication,

and draws water

from the cistern. And

this one projects a projection of any size, and draws water. [

See the illustration on the following page]

And Rav Yehuda, on his own authority [

not in the name of Shmuel]

said: Even if

he projects from his wall

a reed [

a cane], which is not so conspicuous, it suffices.

Abaye said to Rav Yosef: This statement that

Rav

Yehuda

said, that at least a cane is required for the correction,

is Shmuel's!

That is, he learned it from Shmuel, his teacher, and did not learn it from Rav, his teacher. [

Although Rav Yehuda explicitly stated it in the name of Shmuel, it was now assumed that Abaye had heard the statement as follows: Rav Yehuda said: In the case of a cistern between two courtyards, this one projects a cane of any size and draws water.]

For if

you say that this statement of Rav Yehuda

is Rav's,

it

was said

by Rav:

A person does not prohibit another person through the air,

and even a correction of any size, such as a cane, is not required.

And we explain:

And Shmuel's view: From where?

That is, from which statement of Shmuel did Rav Yehuda learn that Shmuel holds that a correction of any size is required even when one uses the place through the air?

If you say, from this statement that Rav Naḥman said in the name of Shmuel [

above, page 84b]:

A roof adjacent to the public domain requires a fixed ladder in order to permit its use,

then it follows that the residents of the public domain prohibit use even through the air, since ordinarily there are projections [fences] near the walls of the public domain, and the residents of the public domain use the roof through the air across four handbreadths?

It cannot be said that he learned it from this statement:

For

perhaps, as

he explained it

Rav Pappa

above, it is referring to a case in which the residents of the public domain use the roof in their usual manner, with a hat and a scarf.

Therefore, we retract this explanation and say:

Rather,

Abaye was fully aware that Rav Yehuda had stated in the name of Shmuel the ruling concerning a cistern between two courtyards.

And Abaye came to say: When Rav Yehuda said, “Even a cane,” he did not come to dispute Shmuel, but to explain his statement.

And this is what Abaye meant: From Rav Yehuda's statement, “Even a cane,” you infer that a person prohibits another person through the air and that a slight correction is required. He learned this from Shmuel, and

from this

he learned it: Shmuel said,

“This one projects a projection of any size and draws water, and this one projects a projection of any size and draws water,”

and you may infer from it:

The reason is that he projected [

that he projected] a projection of any size; only then is he permitted to draw water.

But if he did not project

a projection,

we say: A person prohibits another person through the air,

and a correction of any size is required.

And since Shmuel said “a projection of any size,” and did not say “a projection four handbreadths wide,” you may infer that even an ordinary cane suffices.

We further explain:

And Rav—

for it is possible to learn from him that a person does not prohibit another person, even through the air, and that even a correction of any size is not required, as we said—

from where

do you learn that he holds this view?

If you say, from this,

as we learned [and brought above, page 84b]:

Two balconies, one above the other,

and they are not aligned with one another.

If they made a partition

in order to draw water from the sea beneath the balcony

for the upper one, but they did not make a partition for the lower one, both are prohibited

from drawing water through the upper balcony

until they establish an eruv,

since they prohibit one another.

And

concerning

this Rav Huna said in the name of Rav:

They taught

that the lower balcony prohibits the upper one

only when it is adjacent,

meaning that the upper balcony is adjacent to the lower one across the width of the wall, within four handbreadths.

But when it is distant—

across the width of the wall—

four

handbreadths, and the lower balcony must use the upper one across four handbreadths of air, this is not considered use, and

the upper one is permitted and the lower one is prohibited.

We see, then, that Rav holds that a person does not prohibit another person through the air, and that even a correction of any size is not required.

This is not conclusive:

For

perhaps here it is different,

since the lower balcony does not prohibit the upper one,

because, for this one [

the lower balcony],

it is by throwing [

the phrase has two implications: throwing upward and throwing across a distance],

and

also

lowering

into the sea, which involves three exertions,

whereas for this one [

the upper balcony]

it is by lowering alone.

As

in the principle,

“for this one it is by throwing, and for this one it is through an opening, they are considered equivalent,”

we assign the one with an opening—that is, in our case, the upper balcony—the more advantageous status.

Rather, from this statement that Rav Naḥman said in the name of Rabba bar Avuha, who said in the name of Rav,

we can know that a person does not prohibit another person through the air:

Two houses

belonging to two people

and three ruins

whose partitions are breached toward one another

between them, [

and the ruins have no residents apart from the residents of the houses who use them, but the houses do not open onto them by means of an entrance]:

This

one householder

uses the ruin adjacent to him [

the ruin adjacent to him]

by throwing

from his window, which opens onto the ruin adjacent to him.

And this one uses the ruin adjacent to him by throwing,

and neither prohibits the other, even though the ruins are breached toward one another, since each person's use of a ruin that is not adjacent to him is through the air across four handbreadths.

But he may not use the ruin that is not adjacent to him on Shabbat by throwing, since his fellow uses that place comfortably by lowering.