## Eruvin Daf 75b

###### Eruvin 75b:1
[Eruvin 75b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:1)

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: נָתְנוּ עֵירוּבָן בַּחִיצוֹנָה, וְשָׁכַח אֶחָד, בֵּין מִן הַחִיצוֹנָה וּבֵין מִן הַפְּנִימִית, וְלֹא עֵירַב — שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת, נָתְנוּ עֵירוּבָן בַּפְּנִימִית, וְשָׁכַח אֶחָד מִן הַפְּנִימִית וְלֹא עֵירַב — שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת. מִן הַחִיצוֹנָה וְלֹא עֵירַב — שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: בָּזוֹ, פְּנִימִית מוּתֶּרֶת וְחִיצוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**That was also taught** in a *baraita*: If **they placed their *eiruv* in the outer** courtyard, **and one** person **forgot** to contribute to the ***eiruv*, whether he is** a resident **of the outer** courtyard **or of the inner** one, **they are both prohibited.** If **they put their *eiruv* in the inner** courtyard, **and one** resident **of the inner** courtyard **forgot** to contribute to the ***eiruv*, they are both prohibited.** Similarly, if one of the residents **of the outer** courtyard **did not** contribute to the ***eiruv*, they are both prohibited.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Akiva. And the Rabbis** disagree and **say: In this** case, where the *eiruv* was deposited in the inner courtyard and the person who forgot to contribute to the *eiruv* was a resident of the outer one, the **inner** courtyard **is permitted and the outer one is prohibited.**


###### Eruvin 75b:2
[Eruvin 75b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:2)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבָּה בַּר חָנָן לְאַבָּיֵי: מַאי שְׁנָא לְרַבָּנַן דְּאָמְרִי פְּנִימִית מוּתֶּרֶת — מִשּׁוּם דְּאָחֲדָא דַּשָּׁא וּמִשְׁתַּמְּשָׁא, לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא נָמֵי: תֵּיחַד דַּשָּׁא וּתְשַׁמֵּשׁ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: עֵירוּב מַרְגִּילָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba bar Ḥanan said to Abaye: What is different according to the Rabbis, who say** that the **inner** courtyard **is permitted?** It is **because** the residents of the inner courtyard can **shut the door** of their courtyard to the members of the outer one **and use** the inner courtyard on their own. But if so, **according to Rabbi Akiva as well, let** the residents of the inner courtyard **shut the door** of their courtyard to the members of the outer one **and use** their courtyard on their own. Abaye **said to him:** If the *eiruv* of the outer courtyard was not placed in the inner courtyard, your argument would be valid. But the fact that **the *eiruv*** is deposited in the inner courtyard **accustoms** the residents of the outer courtyard to enter it.


###### Eruvin 75b:3
[Eruvin 75b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:3)

לְרַבָּנַן נָמֵי עֵירוּב מַרְגִּילָהּ! דְּאָמְרָה: לְתַקּוֹנֵי שַׁיתַּפְתִּיךְ, וְלָא לְעַוּוֹתֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If so, **according to the Rabbis as well** we should say that the placement of the ***eiruv*** in the inner courtyard **accustoms** the residents of the outer courtyard to enter it. The Gemara answers: The reasoning of the Rabbis is **that** the members of the inner courtyard can **say** to the members of the outer one: **We joined with you** in a single *eiruv* **to** our **benefit, and not to** our **detriment.** Since one of your residents forgot to contribute to the *eiruv*, we no longer acquiesce to this partnership.


###### Eruvin 75b:4
[Eruvin 75b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:4)

לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא נָמֵי תֵּימָא: לְתַקּוֹנֵי שַׁיתַּפְתִּיךְ וְלָא לְעַוּוֹתֵי? דְּאָמְרָה לַהּ: מְבַטְּלִינַן לָךְ רְשׁוּתִי. וְרַבָּנַן, אֵין בִּיטּוּל רְשׁוּת מֵחָצֵר לְחָצֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **According to Rabbi Akiva as well, let** the residents of the inner courtyard **say** to the residents of the outer courtyard: **We joined with you to** our **benefit and not to** our **detriment.** The Gemara answers that according to Rabbi Akiva, the case is **that** the residents of the outer courtyard **said** to the residents of the inner courtyard: **We renounce our rights in your favor,** in which case the inhabitants of the inner courtyard are permitted to carry in their own courtyard. Consequently, his ruling that the inner courtyard is also prohibited applies only before the residents of the outer courtyard renounce their rights. **And the Rabbis** hold that **there is no renunciation of rights from courtyard to courtyard.**


###### Eruvin 75b:5
[Eruvin 75b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:5)

לֵימָא שְׁמוּאֵל וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בִּפְלוּגְתָּא דְּרַבָּנַן וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא קָא מִיפַּלְגִי. דִּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר כְּרַבָּנַן, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Let us say** that **Shmuel and Rabbi Yoḥanan,** who disagree about whether there is renunciation of rights from one courtyard to another, **disagree about the** same point that was the subject of a **disagreement between the Rabbis and Rabbi Akiva. As Shmuel said** that there is no renunciation of rights from one courtyard to another, **in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis, and Rabbi Yoḥanan said** that such renunciation is valid, **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva.**


###### Eruvin 75b:6
[Eruvin 75b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:6)

אָמַר לְךָ שְׁמוּאֵל: אֲנָא דַּאֲמַרִי אֲפִילּוּ לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הָכָא, אֶלָּא בִּשְׁתֵּי חֲצֵירוֹת זוֹ לִפְנִים מִזּוֹ, דְּאָסְרָן אַהֲדָדֵי, אֲבָל הָתָם, מִי קָא אָסְרָן אַהֲדָדֵי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **Shmuel** could have **said to you: What I said is even in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva stated** his opinion that there is renunciation of rights from one courtyard to another **only here, with regard to two courtyards, one within the other, which render each other prohibited. However, there,** where they disagree about two adjacent courtyards, **do** the courtyards **render each other prohibited?** Consequently, even Rabbi Akiva would agree that there is no renunciation of rights from one courtyard to another.


###### Eruvin 75b:7
[Eruvin 75b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:7)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֲנָא דַּאֲמַרִי אֲפִילּוּ לְרַבָּנַן. עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמְרִי רַבָּנַן הָכָא, אֶלָּא דְּאָמְרָה לַהּ: אַדִּמְבַטְּלַתְּ לִי, קָא אָסְרַתְּ עִלַּאי. אֲבָל הָתָם, מִי קָאָסְרָה עֲלַהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan** could have **said: What I said is even in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis. The Rabbis stated** their opinion that there is no renunciation of rights from one courtyard to another **only** in the case **here, as** the residents of the inner courtyard **said to** the residents of the outer courtyard: **Until you renounce** your rights **in our favor, you render** it **prohibited** for **us** to carry, and therefore, we will have no connection with you and forgo both the renunciation and the prohibition. **But there, does** one courtyard **prohibit** the other? Since it does not, even the Rabbis would agree that there is renunciation from one courtyard to another.


###### Eruvin 75b:8
[Eruvin 75b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:8)

וְאִם הָיוּ שֶׁל יְחִידִים וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, תָּנֵי רַבִּי: הָיוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה — אֲסוּרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in the mishna: **And if** the courtyards belonged **to individuals,** i.e., if only one person lived in each courtyard, they are not required to establish an *eiruv*. **Rav Yosef said: Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **teaches** that if **there were three** people living in the two courtyards, whether two people lived in the outer courtyard and one person in the inner one, or two people lived in the inner courtyard and one person lived in the outer one, **they are prohibited** from carrying without an *eiruv*.


###### Eruvin 75b:9
[Eruvin 75b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:9)

אֲמַר לְהוּ רַב בִּיבִי: לָא תְּצִיתוּ לֵיהּ, אֲנָא אַמְרִיתַהּ נִיהֲלֵהּ, וּמִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה אַמְרִיתַהּ נִיהֲלֵהּ, הוֹאִיל וַאֲנִי קוֹרֵא בָּהֶן רַבִּים בַּחִיצוֹנָה. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: מָרֵיהּ דְּאַבְרָהָם! ״רַבִּים״ בְּ״רַבִּי״ אִיחַלַּף לִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Beivai said to** the Sages: **Do not listen to him,** as he is mistaken. **I told it to him, and I told it to him in the name of Rav Adda bar Ahava,** not Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, but due to his illness Rav Yosef forgot this detail. And the reason that the residents of both courtyards are prohibited from carrying if two people are living in the outer courtyard is that **since I call them many in the outer** courtyard, the Sages issued a decree prohibiting carrying, due to a case in which there are two people living in the inner courtyard. When he heard this, **Rav Yosef said** in astonishment: **Master of Abraham! I mistook** the word **Rabbi for** the word **many [*rabbim*].** He now realized that he had mistakenly understood this ruling as attributed to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi rather than a *halakha* regarding many, an error that led to his inaccurate version of the teaching.


###### Eruvin 75b:10
[Eruvin 75b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:10)

וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם מוּתָּרוֹת, עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ שְׁנַיִם בַּפְּנִימִית וְאֶחָד בַּחִיצוֹנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Shmuel said: Actually, they are permitted, unless there are two** people living **in the inner** courtyard **and one in the outer one.**


###### Eruvin 75b:11
[Eruvin 75b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:11)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: וְגוֹי הֲרֵי הוּא כְּרַבִּים. מַאי שְׁנָא יִשְׂרָאֵל דְּלָא אָסַר, דְּמַאן דְּיָדַע — יָדַע, וּמַאן דְּלָא יָדַע סָבַר: עָירוֹבֵי עָירֵב, גּוֹי נָמֵי, אָמְרִינַן: דְּיָדַע — יָדַע, דְּלָא יָדַע סָבַר: אֲגִירֵי אוֹגַר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Elazar said: And a gentile is** considered **like many,** i.e., if a gentile lives in the inner courtyard, the gentile’s right of way in the outer courtyard renders it prohibited to carry there. The Gemara asks: **What is different** about **an** individual **Jew** living in the inner courtyard, that **he does not prohibit** the resident of the outer courtyard? **Because one who knows** that only one person lives there **knows** this fact, **and one who does not know** this **thinks** that **an *eiruv* has been established.** If so, in the case of **a gentile also, we** should **say that** one **who knows** that only one person lives there **knows,** and one **who does not know** this **thinks** that the Jew must have **rented** the domain from the gentile.


###### Eruvin 75b:12
[Eruvin 75b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:12)

סְתָם גּוֹי, אִי אִיתָא דְּאוֹגַר — מִיפְעָא פָּעֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: This is not so, as **a typical gentile, if he** had **rented** out his domain, **he would chatter** about it, and everyone would know. If he has not talked about it, everyone will assume that he did not rent out his domain.


###### Eruvin 75b:13
[Eruvin 75b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:13)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: עֲשָׂרָה בָּתִּים זֶה לִפְנִים מִזֶּה, פְּנִימִי נוֹתֵן אֶת עֵירוּבוֹ, וְדַיּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said:** If there are **ten houses, one within the other,** so that the person living in the innermost house must pass through all the rest in order to reach the courtyard, **the innermost one** alone **contributes to the *eiruv*** for the courtyard, **and it is enough.** The residents of the other houses are considered as living in the gatehouse and corridor of the innermost one, and therefore they do not have to contribute to the *eiruv*.


###### Eruvin 75b:14
[Eruvin 75b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:14)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ חִיצוֹן. חִיצוֹן בֵּית שַׁעַר הוּא? חִיצוֹן שֶׁל פְּנִימִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Even** the **outer one** must contribute to the *eiruv*. The Gemara asks: The **outer** residence **is a gatehouse** in relation to the inner ones, so why should it have to contribute to the *eiruv*? The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yoḥanan was referring to the **outer** house **of** the **innermost one.** In other words, even the second-to-last house, the outer one only in relation to the innermost house, must contribute to the *eiruv*, as it is not viewed as a gatehouse.


###### Eruvin 75b:15
[Eruvin 75b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:15)

בְּמַאי קָמִיפַּלְגִי? מָר סָבַר: בֵּית שַׁעַר דְּיָחִיד שְׁמֵיהּ בֵּית שַׁעַר. וּמָר סָבַר: לָא שְׁמֵיהּ בֵּית שַׁעַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **With regard to what** principle **do they disagree? One Sage,** Shmuel, **holds** that **the gatehouse of an individual is considered a gatehouse,** and therefore the ninth house, i.e., the second innermost is also a gatehouse, as it serves as a passageway for the individual living in the innermost house, **and one Sage,** Rabbi Yoḥanan, **holds** that the gatehouse of an individual **is not considered a gatehouse,** and therefore the ninth house must also contribute to the *eiruv*.


###### Eruvin 75b:16
[Eruvin 75b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/75b:16)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ אָמַר רַב: שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵירוֹת וּשְׁלֹשָׁה בָּתִּים בֵּינֵיהֶן, זֶה בָּא דֶּרֶךְ זֶה, וְנוֹתֵן עֵירוּבוֹ בָּזֶה. וְזֶה בָּא דֶּרֶךְ זֶה, וְנוֹתֵן עֵירוּבוֹ בָּזֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman said** that **Rabba bar Avuh said** that **Rav said:** With regard to **two courtyards** that have **three houses between them,** and a resident of **this** courtyard **comes through this** house that opens to his courtyard **and places his *eiruv* in that** middle house, **and** a resident of **this** other courtyard **comes through this** house that opens to his courtyard **and places his *eiruv* in that** middle house,