## Eruvin Daf 73b

###### Eruvin 73b:1
[Eruvin 73b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:1)

וְאִם נִשְׁתַּתְּפוּ בַּמָּבוֹי — מוּתָּרִין כָּאן וְכָאן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if they merged** the courtyards of **the alleyway, they are permitted** to carry both **here,** in the alleyway, and **there,** in the courtyards.


###### Eruvin 73b:2
[Eruvin 73b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:2)

עֵירְבוּ בַּחֲצֵירוֹת וְנִשְׁתַּתְּפוּ בַּמָּבוֹי, וְשָׁכַח אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי חָצֵר וְלֹא עֵירַב — מוּתָּרִין כָּאן וְכָאן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **they established an *eiruv* in the courtyards** and also **merged** the courtyards of **the alleyway, and one of the residents of the courtyard forgot and did not** contribute to the ***eiruv*** in his courtyard, but did participate in the merging of the courtyards in the alleyway, **they are permitted** both **here and there,** as the merging of courtyards in the alleyway serves as an effective *eiruv* for the courtyards as well.


###### Eruvin 73b:3
[Eruvin 73b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:3)

מִבְּנֵי מָבוֹי וְלֹא נִשְׁתַּתֵּף — מוּתָּרִין בַּחֲצֵירוֹת וַאֲסוּרִין בַּמָּבוֹי, שֶׁהַמָּבוֹי לַחֲצֵירוֹת כֶּחָצֵר לַבָּתִּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, if one **of the residents of the alleyway** forgot **and did not** participate in the **merging** of courtyards that open into the alleyway, **they are permitted** to carry **in the courtyards and prohibited** from carrying **in the alleyway, as** the principle is: **An alleyway is to** its **courtyards as a courtyard is to** its **houses.**


###### Eruvin 73b:4
[Eruvin 73b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:4)

**גְּמָ׳** מַנִּי? רַבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא, דְּאָמַר: בָּעִינַן עֵירוּב וּבָעִינַן שִׁיתּוּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: In accordance with **whose** opinion is this mishna? The Gemara answers: **It is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, who said: We require an *eiruv* and we** also **require a merging** of the courtyards in an alleyway, and one is not sufficient without the other.


###### Eruvin 73b:5
[Eruvin 73b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:5)

אֵימָא מְצִיעֲתָא: ״וְאִם נִשְׁתַּתְּפוּ בַּמָּבוֹי מוּתָּרִין כָּאן וְכָאן״, אֲתָאן לְרַבָּנַן דְּאָמְרִי בַּחֲדָא סַגִּיא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If so, **say** the **middle clause** of the mishna: **And if they merged** the courtyards **in the alleyway, they are permitted** to carry both **here and there. We have arrived at** the opinion of **the Rabbis, who say** that **one is enough,** and one does not need both an *eiruv* and a merging of alleyways.


###### Eruvin 73b:6
[Eruvin 73b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:6)

הָא לָא קַשְׁיָא: וְאִם נִשְׁתַּתְּפוּ נָמֵי קָאָמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **That is not difficult,** as the mishna **stated** as follows: **And if they also merged** the courtyards in the alleyway, they are permitted to carry in the courtyards and in the alleyway.


###### Eruvin 73b:7
[Eruvin 73b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:7)

אֵימָא סֵיפָא: עֵירְבוּ בַּחֲצֵירוֹת וְנִשְׁתַּתְּפוּ בַּמָּבוֹי, וְשָׁכַח אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי חָצֵר וְלֹא עֵירַב — מוּתָּרִים כָּאן וְכָאן. הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי דְּלָא בַּטֵּיל, אַמַּאי מוּתָּרִים? אֶלָּא פְּשִׁיטָא דְּבַטֵּיל. אֵימָא סֵיפָא: שָׁכַח אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי מָבוֹי וְלֹא נִשְׁתַּתְּפוּ — מוּתָּרִין בַּחֲצֵירוֹת וַאֲסוּרִין בַּמָּבוֹי, וְאִי דְּבַטֵּיל — אַמַּאי אֲסוּרִין בַּמָּבוֹי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Say the latter clause** of the mishna: If **they established an *eiruv* in the courtyards and** also **merged** the courtyards **in the alleyway, and one of the residents of the courtyard forgot and did not** contribute to the ***eiruv*** in his courtyard but did participate in the merging of the alleyway, **they are permitted** to carry both **here and there. What are the circumstances? If** the person who forgot **did not renounce** his rights to the courtyard in favor of the others, **why are they permitted** to carry? **Rather,** it is **obvious that he did renounce** those rights. But if so, **say the last clause** of the mishna: If **one of the members of the alleyway forgot and did not** participate in the **merging** of the alleyway, **they are permitted** to carry **in the courtyards and prohibited** from carrying **in the alleyway. But if he renounced** his rights, **why are they prohibited** from carrying **in the alleyway?**


###### Eruvin 73b:8
[Eruvin 73b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:8)

וְכִי תֵּימָא קָסָבַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר אֵין בִּיטּוּל רְשׁוּת בְּמָבוֹי. וְהָא תַּנְיָא: שֶׁהֲרֵי בִּיטֵּל לָכֶם רְשׁוּתוֹ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say** that **Rabbi Meir holds** that **renunciation of rights is not** effective **in an alleyway,** that answer is insufficient. **Wasn’t it taught** in a *baraita* with regard to an alleyway: **As he renounced his rights in your favor;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir?** This indicates that Rabbi Meir accepts the principle of renunciation of rights in an alleyway.


###### Eruvin 73b:9
[Eruvin 73b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:9)

אֶלָּא פְּשִׁיטָא דְּלָא בַּטֵּיל. וּמִדְּסֵיפָא דְּלָא בַּטֵּיל — רֵישָׁא נָמֵי דְּלָא בַּטֵּיל. רֵישָׁא וְסֵיפָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר, מְצִיעֲתָא רַבָּנַן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it is **obvious** that the person who forgot to participate in the merging of alleyways **did not renounce** his rights. **And from the** fact that **the last clause** of the mishna is referring to a case **where he did not renounce** his rights, it can be inferred that **the first clause** is **also** referring to a case **where he did not renounce** his rights. This would indicate that if they carried out a merging of alleyways, it also serves as an *eiruv*, even when one of them forgot to contribute to the *eiruv* and also failed to renounce his rights in the courtyard. This is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, which leads to the puzzling conclusion that the **first and last clauses** of the mishna are in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** while the **middle clause** is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis.**


###### Eruvin 73b:10
[Eruvin 73b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:10)

כּוּלַּהּ רַבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא, וְטַעְמָא מַאי אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר בָּעִינַן עֵירוּב וּבָעִינַן שִׁיתּוּף? שֶׁלֹּא לְשַׁכֵּחַ תּוֹרַת עֵירוּב מִן הַתִּינוֹקוֹת, וְהָכָא, כֵּיוָן דְּרוּבַּהּ עֵירְבוּ — לָא מִשְׁתַּכְחָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: In fact, **it is all** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir. And what is the reason** that **Rabbi Meir said we require an *eiruv* and we** also **require a merging** of alleyways? It was only so **as not to cause the** halakhic **category of *eiruv* to be forgotten by the children.** If people would only merge courtyards, the *halakha* of establishing an *eiruv* for a courtyard would gradually be forgotten. **And here,** where only one person forgot to contribute to the *eiruv*, **since most of** them **established an *eiruv*** for the courtyards, the *halakha* of an *eiruv* **will not be forgotten.** Therefore, there is room to be lenient after the fact and to permit carrying in both places.


###### Eruvin 73b:11
[Eruvin 73b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:11)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: רַב לָא תָּנֵי ״פְּתוּחוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ״. וְכֵן אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: רַב לָא תָּנֵי ״פְּתוּחוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ״. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, רַב כָּהֲנָא גּוּפֵיהּ לָא תָּנֵי ״פְּתוּחוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda said: Rav did not teach** the mishna as stating that the five courtyards **open into one another,** but rather that each courtyard opens into the alleyway, and each established its own *eiruv*. **And so too, Rav Kahana said: Rav did not teach** the mishna as stating that the courtyards **open into one another. Some say** that **Rav Kahana himself did not teach** the mishna as stating that the courtyards **open into one another.**


###### Eruvin 73b:12
[Eruvin 73b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי לְרַב יוֹסֵף: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּלָא תָּנֵי פְּתוּחוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ. קָסָבַר כׇּל שִׁיתּוּף שֶׁאֵין מַכְנִיסוֹ וּמוֹצִיאוֹ דֶּרֶךְ פְּתָחִים בַּמָּבוֹי — לָאו שְׁמֵיהּ שִׁיתּוּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to Rav Yosef: What is the reason he did not teach** the mishna as stating that the five courtyards **open into one another?** Rav Yosef replied: Because **he holds** that **any merging** of alleyways **that is not brought in and taken out by way of the entrances** that open **into the alleyway,** i.e., which is not brought from each courtyard into the alleyway and then taken from the alleyway into the courtyard where it will be deposited, **is not considered** a valid **merging** of the alleyway. If the food used for the merging of alleyways is transferred directly from one courtyard to another, it seems as though it is being used to establish an *eiruv*. It is therefore ineffective as a merging of alleyways. Here too, if the courtyards open into one another, the merging of alleyways is invalid, due to a concern that the residents of the courtyard will transfer the food directly from one courtyard to another.


###### Eruvin 73b:13
[Eruvin 73b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:13)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ: בַּעַל הַבַּיִת שֶׁהָיָה שׁוּתָּף לִשְׁכֵנָיו, לָזֶה בְּיַיִן וְלָזֶה בְּיַיִן, אֵין צְרִיכִין לְעָרֵב. הָתָם, דְּאַפְּקֵיהּ וְעַיְּילֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**He raised an objection to him** based upon the following mishna: **A homeowner who was a partner of his neighbors, with this one in wine and with that one in wine, they do not need to establish an *eiruv*.** This indicates that it is not actually necessary to transfer the food used for the merging of alleyways from one place to another. For example, it is sufficient to have a jointly owned barrel of wine in one courtyard even if it did not pass through the alleyway. The Gemara rejects this proof and explains the mishna as follows: **There,** it is referring to a case **where they took** the wine **out** into the alleyway and subsequently **brought it in** to the courtyard where it was to be kept.


###### Eruvin 73b:14
[Eruvin 73b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:14)

(אֵיתִיבֵיהּ:) כֵּיצַד מִשְׁתַּתְּפִין בַּמָּבוֹי וְכוּ׳. הָתָם נָמֵי: דְּאַפְּקֵיהּ וְעַיְּילֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**He raised** another **objection to him** from a different mishna: **How does one merge** courtyards that open **into alleyways?** The mishna continues and says that it is sufficient for one person to acquire the food used for the merging on behalf of all the other residents of the alleyway. This indicates that the food does not need to pass through all the courtyards in the alleyway. The Gemara rejects this proof as well: **There too,** it is referring to a case **where they** first **took** the food **out** from each of the courtyards into the alleyway **and** from there **brought it into** the courtyard where it was to be deposited.


###### Eruvin 73b:15
[Eruvin 73b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:15)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַבָּה בַּר חָנָן: אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, הִקְנָה לוֹ פַּת בְּסַלּוֹ הָכִי נָמֵי דְּלָא הָוֵי שִׁיתּוּף?! וְכִי תֵּימָא: הָכִי נָמֵי, וְהָא אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: בְּנֵי חֲבוּרָה שֶׁהָיוּ מְסוּבִּין וְקִדֵּשׁ עֲלֵיהֶן הַיּוֹם — הַפַּת שֶׁעַל שֻׁלְחָן סוֹמְכִים עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם עֵירוּב, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ מִשּׁוּם שִׁיתּוּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba bar Ḥanan strongly objects to this: However, if** that **is so,** if **he transferred ownership of bread in his basket to** another person, **so too, it would not be** considered a valid **merging. And if you say** that **this is** indeed **so, didn’t Rav Yehuda say that Rav said:** With regard to **members of a group who were dining** together on Shabbat eve, **and the day became sanctified for them,** i.e., Shabbat began while they were eating, **they may rely upon the bread on the table as an *eiruv*** for the courtyard, **and some say, as a merging** of the alleyway.


###### Eruvin 73b:16
[Eruvin 73b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:16)

וְאָמַר רַבָּה, לָא פְּלִיגִי: כָּאן בִּמְסוּבִּין בַּבַּיִת, כָּאן בַּמְסוּבִּין בֶּחָצֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabba said:** The two versions **do not disagree** with each other regarding whether the bread counts as an *eiruv* or as a merging of the alleyway. **Here,** where they can use it as an *eiruv*, it is referring to a case **where they were dining in a house,** since food deposited inside a house can serve as an *eiruv* for the courtyard. **There,** it is referring to a case **where they were dining in a courtyard,** and therefore they may rely on the bread as a merging of the alleyway. This proves that even Rav agrees that it is not necessary to take the food used to merge an alleyway into the alleyway itself and then bring it back to the courtyard.


###### Eruvin 73b:17
[Eruvin 73b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:17)

אֶלָּא טַעְמָא דְּרַב, דְּקָא סָבַר: אֵין מָבוֹי נִיתָּר בְּלֶחִי וְקוֹרָה עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ בָּתִּים וַחֲצֵירוֹת פְּתוּחִים לְתוֹכוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** we must retract the previous explanation and say that **the reason Rav** did not teach the mishna as stating that the courtyards opened into one another is **that he holds** that **an alleyway cannot** be **rendered permitted** for carrying **through a side post and** a cross **beam unless there are houses and courtyards opening into it.** If, however, the courtyards open into one another, they are considered like a single courtyard, in which case they cannot be rendered permitted for carrying through a side post or a cross beam, and the merging of the alleyway is ineffective.


###### Eruvin 73b:18
[Eruvin 73b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/73b:18)

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב: אֵין מָבוֹי נִיתָּר בְּלֶחִי וְקוֹרָה

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now examines **the matter itself** cited in the previous discussion. **Rav said: An alleyway cannot** become **permitted** for carrying **through a side post and** a cross **beam,**