## Eruvin Daf 62b

###### Eruvin 62b:1
[Eruvin 62b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:1)

אָמַר מָר: חֲצֵירוֹ שֶׁל גּוֹי הֲרֵי הוּא כְּדִיר שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה. וְהָא אֲנַן תְּנַן: הַדָּר עִם הַנׇּכְרִי בֶּחָצֵר הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹסֵר עָלָיו!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara proceeds to analyze the *Tosefta*: **The Master said** above: **The courtyard of a gentile is like the pen of an animal,** which implies that the residence of a gentile is not considered a significant residence. **But didn’t we learn** otherwise in the mishna: **One who resides with a gentile in** the same **courtyard this** person **prohibits him** from carrying? This implies that a gentile’s residence is in fact of significance.


###### Eruvin 62b:2
[Eruvin 62b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:2)

לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא — דְּאִיתֵיהּ. הָא — דְּלֵיתֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **That** is **not difficult. This** *halakha* in the mishna is referring to a situation **where** the gentile **is present,** and therefore carrying is prohibited, whereas **that** *halakha* in the *Tosefta* refers to a situation **where he is not present,** and therefore carrying is permitted.


###### Eruvin 62b:3
[Eruvin 62b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:3)

וּמַאי קָסָבַר? אִי קָסָבַר דִּירָה בְּלֹא בְּעָלִים שְׁמָהּ דִּירָה — אֲפִילּוּ גּוֹי נָמֵי נִיתְּסַר. וְאִי קָסָבַר דִּירָה בְּלֹא בְּעָלִים לֹא שְׁמָהּ דִּירָה — אֲפִילּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל נָמֵי לָא נִיתְּסַר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara poses a question: **What does** Rabbi Meir **hold? If he holds** that **a residence without** its **owners is** still **considered a residence,** and it is prohibited to carry in the courtyard even when the owner is away, then **even a gentile** in absentia **should likewise render it prohibited** for carrying. **And if he holds** that **a residence without** its **owners is not considered a residence,** then **even a Jew** who is away **should also not render it prohibited** for carrying.


###### Eruvin 62b:4
[Eruvin 62b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:4)

לְעוֹלָם קָסָבַר דִּירָה בְּלֹא בְּעָלִים — לֹא שְׁמָהּ דִּירָה. וְיִשְׂרָאֵל, דְּכִי אִיתֵיהּ אָסַר, כִּי לֵיתֵיהּ — גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Actually, he holds** that **a residence without** its **owners is not considered a residence, but** nevertheless, he draws a distinction between a Jew and a gentile. In the case of **a Jew, who renders it prohibited** to carry for those who dwell in the same courtyard **when** he is **present** in his residence, **the Sages decreed with regard to him** that even **when he is not present,** his residence renders it prohibited for them to carry as though he were present.


###### Eruvin 62b:5
[Eruvin 62b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:5)

גּוֹי, דְּכִי אִיתֵיהּ — גְּזֵירָה שֶׁמָּא יִלְמַד מִמַּעֲשָׂיו. כִּי אִיתֵיהּ — אָסַר, כִּי לֵיתֵיהּ — לָא אָסַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, with regard to **a gentile,** who even **when he is present** does not fundamentally render it prohibited to carry, but only due to **a rabbinic decree** that was issued **lest** the Jew **learn from** the gentile’s **ways,** no further decree was necessary. Thus, **when he is present,** the gentile **renders it prohibited to** carry; but **when he is not present, he does not render it prohibited to** carry.


###### Eruvin 62b:6
[Eruvin 62b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:6)

וְכִי לֵיתֵיהּ, לָא אָסַר? וְהָתְנַן: הַמַּנִּיחַ אֶת בֵּיתוֹ וְהָלַךְ לוֹ לִשְׁבּוֹת בְּעִיר אַחֶרֶת, אֶחָד נׇכְרִי וְאֶחָד יִשְׂרָאֵל אוֹסֵר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And when** the gentile **is not present, does he** really **not render it prohibited** for carrying? **Didn’t we learn** elsewhere in a mishna: With regard to **one who left his house** without establishing an *eiruv* **and went to spend Shabbat in a different town, whether** he was **a gentile or a Jew, he renders it prohibited** for the other residents of his courtyard to carry objects from their houses to the courtyard and vice versa. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir.** This indicates that according to Rabbi Meir, a gentile renders it prohibited to carry in the courtyard even if he is not present.


###### Eruvin 62b:7
[Eruvin 62b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:7)

הָתָם דְּאָתֵי בְּיוֹמֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There,** it is referring to a situation **where** the person who left his house without establishing an *eiruv* intends to **return on that** same **day,** on Shabbat. Since upon his return he will render it prohibited for others to carry in the courtyard, the decree is applied even before he returns home. However, if he left his house intending to return after the conclusion of Shabbat, he does not render it prohibited to carry, in absentia.


###### Eruvin 62b:8
[Eruvin 62b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:8)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב. וְרַב הוּנָא אָמַר: מִנְהָג כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: נָהֲגוּ הָעָם כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said:** The ***halakha*** in this dispute **is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov. And Rav Huna said:** This is not an established *halakha* to be issued publicly; rather, **the custom is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov,** i.e., a Sage would rule according to his opinion for those who come to ask. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The people are accustomed** to conduct themselves **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov.** Accordingly, a Sage would not issue such a ruling even to those who inquire, but if someone acts leniently in accordance with his opinion, he would not object.


###### Eruvin 62b:9
[Eruvin 62b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:9)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי לְרַב יוֹסֵף: קַיְימָא לַן מִשְׁנַת רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב קַב וְנָקִי, וְאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to Rav Yosef,** his teacher: **We maintain** that **the teaching of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov** measures **a kav, but is clean,** meaning that it is small in quantity but clear and complete, and that the *halakha* is in accordance with his opinion in all instances. Moreover, with regard to our issue, **Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said:** The ***halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov,** and therefore there is no doubt about the matter.


###### Eruvin 62b:10
[Eruvin 62b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:10)

מַהוּ לְאוֹרוֹיֵי בִּמְקוֹם רַבּוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to whether a disciple **may issue a ruling** according to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov **in his teacher’s place** of jurisdiction, i.e., in a place where he is the recognized authority? Although it is usually prohibited to do so, perhaps such an evident and well-known principle such as this does not fall into the category of rulings that a disciple may not issue in his teacher’s territory.


###### Eruvin 62b:11
[Eruvin 62b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:11)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲפִילּוּ בֵּיעֲתָא בְּכוּתָּחָא בְּעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַב חִסְדָּא כׇּל שְׁנֵי דְּרַב הוּנָא, וְלָא אוֹרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Yosef **said to** Abaye: **Even** when **Rav Ḥisda was asked** about the permissibility of cooking **an egg in *kutaḥ*,** a dairy dish, **throughout the years of Rav Huna’s** life, **he refused to issue a ruling.** Rav Ḥisda was a disciple of Rav Huna, and a disciple may not issue a ruling in his teacher’s place of jurisdiction about even the simplest of matters.


###### Eruvin 62b:12
[Eruvin 62b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אַבָּא לְאַבָּיֵי: כְּגוֹן מְגִלַּת תַּעֲנִית דִּכְתִיבָא וּמַנְּחָא. מַהוּ לְאוֹרוֹיֵי בְּאַתְרֵיהּ דְּרַבֵּיהּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ, הָכִי אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: אֲפִילּוּ בֵּיעֲתָא בְּכוּתָּחָא בְּעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַב חִסְדָּא כׇּל שְׁנֵי דְּרַב הוּנָא, וְלָא אוֹרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Ya’akov bar Abba said to Abaye:** With regard to matters **such as** those detailed in ***Megillat Ta’anit*, which** is **written and laid** on the shelf for all to access and offers a list of the days on which fasting is prohibited, **what is** the *halakha* concerning whether or not a disciple **may rule** about these matters **in his teacher’s place** of jurisdiction? Abaye **said to him: Rav Yosef said as follows: Even** when **Rav Ḥisda was asked about** the permissibility of cooking **an egg in *kutaḥ* throughout the years of Rav Huna’s** life, **he refused to issue a ruling.**


###### Eruvin 62b:13
[Eruvin 62b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/62b:13)

רַב חִסְדָּא אוֹרִי בְּכַפְרִי בִּשְׁנֵי דְּרַב הוּנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rav Ḥisda** nonetheless **issued** halakhic **rulings in** the town of **Kafri during the years of Rav Huna’s** life, as he was not actually in his teacher’s place.