Eruvin 89a — the Talmud in English

Rava said: ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

They taught this

that those who do not have a pit adjacent to their upper story are forbidden to pour,

but

when

they did not make an eruv

the residents of the upper stories with the courtyard in which the pit is.

But if they made an eruv—

they are permitted.

And we explain it:

And when they did not make an eruv—

for what reason is it not

permitted for them to pour?

Rav Ashi said:

Since the pit is not adjacent to their upper story, they are forbidden because of

a decree, lest

they wish to pour their water into the pit that is distant from them, and

they come to take out from the vessels of the houses—

that they would come to take out from the vessels of the houses into which the wastewater is poured—

there

[to the pit, in order to pour into it].

And since it is in a courtyard that has not been joined by an eruv, it follows that they are carrying from their house into a courtyard for which no eruv was made.

But those whose pit is adjacent to their upper story pour their water in the upper story, and it descends by itself into the pit adjacent to it.

We have returned to you, chapter “How Do They Join in Partnership”

Mishna:

All roofs

of

the city—

one domain

are with regard to carrying on Shabbat, even though the houses are separate domains, so that one may not carry between them if they did not make an eruv together.

That is: it is permitted to carry from the roof of this person’s house to the roof of another person’s house utensils that had rested on the roof from before daybreak.

And the Sages did not prohibit carrying from one person’s roof to another person’s roof, despite their being roofs of separate domains, since the use of the roof is not regular and designated, as is the use of a dwelling.

Therefore, the roofs of the different owners are not considered a “division of domains”; rather, all roofs are considered one domain for carrying.

And all the more so, it is permitted to carry from one courtyard to another courtyard utensils that had been in the courtyard from before daybreak. And likewise from one karkaf to another karkaf [a place designated for storing wood].

Since the use of a courtyard or a karkaf is not like the use of a house, which is regular and designated for dwelling.

And the Mishna did not state the permission to carry from courtyard to courtyard and from karkaf to karkaf; rather, it stated the law of roofs, in order to teach us that even the roofs of the city are one domain. For there was room to prohibit carrying from roof to roof, because just as the dwellings of the houses are divided below, so are they divided in their roofs above.

Therefore the Mishna teaches that it is permitted to carry even from this person’s roof to another person’s roof. [According to the Gemara below, page 90b].

The entire permission is with regard to carrying utensils that had rested at the onset of Shabbat on the roof, in the courtyard, or in the karkaf.

But to take utensils that had rested at the onset of Shabbat in his house to his roof or to his fellow’s courtyard is prohibited.

Provided that one roof is not

one

ten high

handbreadths above its fellow,

or lower

than it

ten

handbreadths. For then it is prohibited to carry from one to the other, even if the two roofs belong to one person [according to Rashi below, 91a], as the Gemara explains the reason shortly,

the words of Rabbi Meir.

And the Sages say:

Roofs are not like courtyards and karkafot. Rather,

each and every one—

a domain in its own right!

For with roofs we say: just as dwellings are divided below, so dwellings are divided above.

And all that we said concerning carrying on roofs, in courtyards, and in karkafot is when one comes to carry within them themselves.

But carrying from a roof to a courtyard is prohibited according to Rabbi Meir, just as it is prohibited to carry from a high roof to a low roof. And according to the Sages it is permitted.

And from a roof or from a courtyard to a karkaf—according to everyone it is prohibited, even if they belong to one owner, since their uses and their names are not equal.

But from a roof to a courtyard is called an equal use, and it is permitted according to the opinion of the Sages.

Rabbi Shimon says: both roofs, both courtyards, and both karkafot—

are one domain!

And it is not necessary to say that it is permitted to carry in these domains individually; rather, even from a roof to a courtyard [which is prohibited according to Rabbi Meir], and from a roof and courtyard to a karkaf [which is prohibited both according to Rabbi Meir and according to the Sages], it is also permitted, according to Rabbi Shimon.

And it follows that Rabbi Shimon is more lenient than them all!

And carrying from a roof and courtyard to a karkaf was permitted only when the karkaf is no larger than a beit se’ah.

But when it is larger than a beit se’ah, since the enclosure of the karkaf’s partitions was not made for dwelling, one may not carry into it, because it is prohibited for carrying like a karmelit. And it has the same law as an enclosure larger than a beit se’ah that was not enclosed for dwelling, whose law is that of a karmelit; and even carrying within it more than four cubits is prohibited [as explained above, page 23a].

The permission to carry on roofs, in courtyards, and in karkafot is only

for utensils that had rested

from before daybreak

within

one of these three domains.

And

not for utensils that had rested

during Shabbat [even if they were not there at the onset of Shabbat—Chazon Ish]

inside the house,

and he took them out to the courtyard by means of an eruv. For those utensils that had rested in the house may not be taken out to another courtyard unless the two courtyards made an eruv together, Rashi.

And the same law applies if they had rested in the house and he took them out to the roof: it is prohibited to carry them to another roof.

Gemara:

Abaye bar Avin and Rabbi Hanina bar Avin were sitting, and Abaye was sitting with them.

And they sat and said

in explanation of the dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Sages:

Granted, the Sages,

who prohibit carrying from roof to roof,

hold: just as dwellings are divided below

inside the houses,

so dwellings are divided above,

and each roof is considered a separate domain in its own right.

But Rabbi Meir—

what does he hold?

If he holds: just as dwellings are divided below, so dwellings are divided above—

why

did he say that all the roofs of the city

are one domain?!

And if he holds that they are not divided

above, and because

everything above ten

handbreadths

is one domain!

If so,

even a roof ten high

handbreadths above its fellow, or

ten lower

handbreadths than its fellow—

also

should it be permitted to carry from one to the other; and why did Rabbi Meir prohibit it?!

Abaye said to them:

And have you not

heard that which Rav Yitzhak bar Avdimi said:

Rabbi Meir used to say: Wherever you find two domains

divided from one another, each of which stands alone in its own right,

and even

они

they are one domain

that both of them are private domains [and even if they belong to one owner—the method of Rashi; see Ritba],

such as a pillar in a private domain

in a courtyard [Rashi; see Ritba as to what this is intended to exclude],

ten high

handbreadths

and four wide

handbreadths—which has a “separate domain” of its own, since it is divided by a height of ten and a width of four—

it is prohibited to place a burden upon it

[to place his burden upon it and take it from there].

As a decree because of a mound

ten high and four wide, standing

in the public domain,

for one who places a burden upon it is bringing from the public domain into the private domain, for which he is liable to a sin-offering.

And if so, Abaye argued to them:

here too,

in the Mishna, since one roof is divided from its fellow by a height of ten, we decree not to take from one to the other,

as a decree because of a mound in the public domain!

They thought,

Abaye bar Avin and Rav Hanina understood from these words of Abaye that

even a mortar

standing in a private domain, ten handbreadths high and four handbreadths wide,

and even a tub

that divides off a domain of its own—it is prohibited according to Rabbi Meir to place a burden upon it!

Abaye said to them:

It is not as you think!

Rather,

thus the Master said

[Rabba]:

He did not say

that it is prohibited,

except for a pillar

in a private domain

and the mill channel

[the entire structure for setting up the mill is called “the mill channel”]—

since a person fixes a place for them

where they will stand permanently!

And we raise a difficulty:

but a wall between two courtyards is fixed,

and we should have said that according to Rabbi Meir it is prohibited to carry from the courtyard onto the wall.

And

nevertheless

Rav Yehuda said

[below in the discussion, where it will be explained further]:

when you analyze the matter

[when you examine the matter carefully, you will find] that

according to the words of Rabbi Meir

in our Mishna:

roofs are a domain unto themselves

and it is permitted to carry from one to the other;

courtyards are a domain unto themselves

and it is permitted to carry from courtyard to courtyard; and

karkafot are a domain unto themselves.

And we infer:

is it not

Rav Yehuda’s intention to say

that it is permitted to carry

according to Rabbi Meir from courtyard to courtyard even

by way of

[on top of]

the wall

between them?

And let it be difficult: should we not decree against taking out from the courtyard to the wall because of a mound in the public domain?!

And we answer:

Rav Huna bar Yehuda said in the name of Rav Sheshet: No

did Rav Yehuda say that it is permitted to take out from courtyard to courtyard by way of a wall, but rather

to bring in and take out

from courtyard to courtyard

by way of the openings

between them.

But by way of the wall between them it is prohibited, as a decree because of a mound in the public domain.

We learned in the Mishna:

And the Sages say: each and every one

of the roofs

is a domain in its own right:

It was stated: Rav said:

Since it is prohibited to carry from roof to roof according to the Sages,

each of the roofs is considered a “domain that was entirely breached into a place in which carrying is prohibited.”

And every place that was entirely breached into another domain in which carrying is prohibited receives the law of a karmelit. Therefore, on each of the roofs

one may carry only within four cubits,

as in a karmelit!

And Shmuel said:

Since there are partitions inside the houses corresponding to the boundaries of the roofs, we say: “Draw up and raise the partitions” onto the roof. The domains are thus separated from one another, and they are not entirely breached into a place in which carrying is prohibited for them. Therefore—

it is permitted to carry throughout it,

on each and every roof.

And we explain their dispute:

with regard to partitions

of the houses

that are recognizable

to those standing on the roof, such as when the houses are separated from one another—

everyone agrees

that we say “draw up and raise the partitions” concerning them, and it is permitted to carry throughout the roof.

They disagree

Rav and Shmuel

with regard to partitions that are not recognizable

to those standing on the roof, such as when the roofs are joined together and cover the partitions between the houses.

Rav said: one may carry within it only within four cubits,

because

he did not say, “Draw up and raise the partition”

with regard to such partitions.

And Shmuel said: it is permitted to carry throughout it, for he said

“Draw up and raise the partition”

even with regard to partitions that are not recognizable.