## Eruvin Daf 76a

###### Eruvin 76a:1
[Eruvin 76a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:1)

זֶה נַעֲשֶׂה בֵּית שַׁעַר לָזֶה, וְזֶה נַעֲשֶׂה בֵּית שַׁעַר לָזֶה. אֶמְצָעִי הָוֵה לֵיהּ בַּיִת שֶׁמַּנִּיחִין בּוֹ עֵירוּב, וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לִיתֵּן אֶת הַפַּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**this** outer house **becomes a gatehouse to this** courtyard, **and that** outer house **becomes a gatehouse to that** courtyard, and therefore the residents of the outer houses need not contribute to the *eiruv*. **The middle** house between them **is the house in which the *eiruv* is placed,** and therefore its residents **need not contribute bread** for the *eiruv*.


###### Eruvin 76a:2
[Eruvin 76a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:2)

בָּדֵיק לְהוּ רַחֲבָה לְרַבָּנַן: שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת וּשְׁנֵי בָתִּים בֵּינֵיהֶם, זֶה בָּא דֶּרֶךְ זֶה וְנָתַן עֵירוּבוֹ בָּזֶה, וָזֶה בָּא דֶּרֶךְ זֶה וְנָתַן עֵירוּבוֹ בָּזֶה, קָנוּ עֵירוּב אוֹ לָא? מִי מְשַׁוֵּית לְהוּ לְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי בַּיִת, וּלְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי בֵּית שַׁעַר [וּלְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי בֵּית שַׁעַר, וּלְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי בַּיִת]?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sage **Raḥava tested the** other **Sages:** If there were **two courtyards and two houses between them,** and a resident of **this** courtyard **came through this** house that opens to his courtyard **and placed his *eiruv* in that** house farther from his courtyard, **and** a resident of **this** other courtyard **came through this** house that opens to his courtyard **and placed his *eiruv* in that** house that opens to the other courtyard, did **they acquire the *eiruv* or not,** i.e., are the two *eiruvin* valid? **Do you render it a house with regard to this** courtyard, whose *eiruv* was placed there, **and a gatehouse with regard to that** one who passed through it in order to place his *eiruv* in the other house? **And** similarly, do you render the other house **a gatehouse with regard to this** one **and a house with regard to that** one?


###### Eruvin 76a:3
[Eruvin 76a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:3)

אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: שְׁנֵיהֶן לֹא קָנוּ עֵירוּב, מָה נַפְשָׁךְ: אִי בֵּית שַׁעַר מְשַׁוֵּית לֵיהּ, הַנּוֹתֵן אֶת עֵירוּבוֹ בְּבֵית שַׁעַר אַכְסַדְרָה וּמִרְפֶּסֶת — אֵינוֹ עֵירוּב. אִי בַּיִת מְשַׁוֵּית לֵיהּ — קָא מְטַלְטֵל לְבַיִת דְּלָא מְעָרֵב לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages **said to** Raḥava: **Neither** of them **has acquired** his ***eiruv*. Whichever way you** look at it, it is difficult: **If you consider** either house **a gatehouse,** the *halakha* with regard to **one who places his *eiruv* in a gatehouse, a porch, or a balcony,** is that **it is not a** valid ***eiruv*.** And **if you consider** either one **a house, he would be carrying into a house for which he is not establishing an *eiruv*.** Since the assumption that benefits one of them harms the other, and there is no way to establish firmly the status of these houses, the residents of both courtyards fail to acquire their *eiruv*.


###### Eruvin 76a:4
[Eruvin 76a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:4)

וּמַאי שְׁנָא מִדְּרָבָא? דְּאָמַר רָבָא: אָמְרוּ לוֹ שְׁנַיִם צֵא וְעָרֵב עָלֵינוּ. לְאֶחָד עֵירַב עָלָיו מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם, וּלְאֶחָד עֵירַב עָלָיו בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת. זֶה שֶׁעֵירַב עָלָיו מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם נֶאֱכַל עֵירוּבוֹ בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, וְזֶה שֶׁעֵירַב עָלָיו בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת נֶאֱכַל עֵירוּבוֹ מִשֶּׁתֶּחְשַׁךְ — שְׁנֵיהֶם קָנוּ עֵירוּב!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Raḥava asked: **What** makes this case **different from** the ruling of **Rava? As Rava said:** In the case of **two** people who **said to** one person: **Go and establish an *eiruv*** of Shabbat limits **for** each of **us,** and **he established an *eiruv* for one** of them **while it was still day, and he established an *eiruv* for** the other **one during twilight,** and **the *eiruv* of the one for whom he established an *eiruv* while it was still day was eaten during twilight, and the *eiruv* of the one for whom he established an *eiruv* during twilight was eaten after nightfall, both of them have acquired their *eiruv*.** Twilight is of doubtful status as to whether it is considered day or night. If it is night, any *eiruv* established at that time is invalid, and if it is day, any *eiruv* eaten at that time is invalid. Rava nonetheless ruled leniently, despite the fact that two contradictory assumptions are involved, in keeping with the principle that in cases of doubt relating to an *eiruv*, the *halakha* is lenient. Consequently, with regard to the one whose *eiruv* was eaten during twilight, it is considered as though it was already night, and therefore his *eiruv* had already taken effect while it was still day before it was eaten. Conversely, with regard to the one whose *eiruv* was established during twilight, that period of time is viewed as day, and therefore his *eiruv* is valid as well.


###### Eruvin 76a:5
[Eruvin 76a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:5)

הָכִי הַשְׁתָּא?! הָתָם סָפֵק יְמָמָא סָפֵק לֵילְיָא לָא מִינַּכְרָא מִילְּתָא, אֲבָל הָכָא, אִי דִּלְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי בַּיִת, לְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי בַּיִת. אִי לְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי בֵּית שַׁעַר, לְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי נָמֵי בֵּית שַׁעַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages respond: **How can** these cases **be compared? There,** where there is **uncertainty** whether it is **day** and **uncertainty** whether it is **night, the matter is not noticeable,** as no one sees exactly when each *eiruv* was established. **But here,** where the houses are clearly distinguishable, **if with regard to this** one, who placed his *eiruv* there, it is **a house,** then **with regard to that** one, who passed through it, it should also be regarded as **a house.** And **if, with regard to this** one, who passed through it, it is **a gatehouse,** then **with regard to that** one, who placed his *eiruv* there, it should **also** be considered **a gatehouse.** Therefore, neither of them acquires his *eiruv*.


###### Eruvin 76a:6
[Eruvin 76a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:6)

**הַדְרָן עֲלָךְ הַדָּר**


###### Eruvin 76a:7
[Eruvin 76a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:7)

מַתְנִי׳ **חַלּוֹן** שֶׁבֵּין שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵירוֹת אַרְבָּעָה עַל אַרְבָּעָה, בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה — מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם. וְאִם רָצוּ — מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If there is **a window** in a wall that separates **between two courtyards,** and the window measures **four by four** handbreadths and is **within ten** handbreadths of the ground, the inhabitants of the courtyards **establish two *eiruvin*,** one for each courtyard. **And if they desire, they** may **establish one *eiruv*,** thereby merging the two courtyards, as they may be considered as one due to the window.


###### Eruvin 76a:8
[Eruvin 76a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:8)

פָּחוֹת מֵאַרְבָּעָה עַל אַרְבָּעָה אוֹ לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, if the window measures **less than four by four** handbreadths, or if it is **above ten** handbreadths from the ground, it is no longer considered a valid opening, and the two courtyards cannot be considered a single courtyard. Therefore, the residents **establish two *eiruvin*, but they** may **not establish one *eiruv*.**


###### Eruvin 76a:9
[Eruvin 76a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:9)

**גְּמָ׳** לֵימָא תְּנַן סְתָמָא כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, דְּאָמַר: כׇּל פָּחוֹת מֵאַרְבָּעָה כְּלָבוּד דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** With regard to the mishna’s determination that the size of the window must be four by four handbreadths, the Gemara asks: **Let us say** that **we learned** an **unattributed** mishna **in accordance with** the previously cited opinion of **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said: Any** gap **less than four** handbreadths **is considered *lavud*,** i.e., two objects are considered connected if the space between them is less than four handbreadths. That would explain why the window must be four handbreadths in size, as otherwise it would be considered as though it were sealed, based on the principle of *lavud*.


###### Eruvin 76a:10
[Eruvin 76a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:10)

אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא כְּרַבָּנַן, עַד כָּאן לָא פְּלִיגִי רַבָּנַן עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן לְבוּדִין, אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן פִּתְחָא אֲפִילּוּ רַבָּנַן מוֹדוּ דְּאִי אִיכָּא אַרְבָּעָה עַל אַרְבָּעָה — חֲשִׁיב, וְאִי לָא — לָא חֲשִׁיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this suggestion: **Even if you say** that the mishna is **in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis** that only gaps of less than three handbreadths are included in the principle of *lavud*, **the Rabbis disagreed with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel only with regard to** the *halakhot* of ***lavud*,** i.e., what is considered connected. **But with regard to an opening, even the Rabbis agree that if there is** an opening of **four by four** handbreadths, it is **significant, and if not, it is not significant.**


###### Eruvin 76a:11
[Eruvin 76a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:11)

פָּחוֹת מֵאַרְבָּעָה וְכוּ׳. פְּשִׁיטָא, כֵּיוָן דְּאָמַר אַרְבָּעָה עַל אַרְבָּעָה בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה — מִמֵּילָא אֲנָא יָדַעְנָא דְּפָחוֹת מֵאַרְבָּעָה וּלְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה לָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It was taught in the mishna: If the window is **less than four** by four handbreadths, or above ten handbreadths from the ground, the residents of each courtyard must establish a separate *eiruv*. The Gemara objects: **This** is **obvious. Since** the mishna **stated** in the previous clause that if the window is **four by four** handbreadths and **within ten** handbreadths from the ground, they establish one *eiruv*, **from** this *halakha* **itself I know** that if the window is **less than four** by four handbreadths **or above ten** handbreadths, they may **not** establish one *eiruv*. Why was it necessary to teach this in the mishna?


###### Eruvin 76a:12
[Eruvin 76a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:12)

הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן טַעְמָא דְּכוּלֵּיהּ לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה, אֲבָל מִקְצָתוֹ בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה — מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם, וְאִם רָצוּ — מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It **teaches us this** matter: **The reason** is specifically that **the entire** window is **above ten** handbreadths; **however,** if **part of it is within ten** handbreadths of the ground, **they establish two *eiruvin*, and if they desire, they** may **establish one *eiruv*.**


###### Eruvin 76a:13
[Eruvin 76a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:13)

תְּנֵינָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: כּוּלּוֹ לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה וּמִקְצָתוֹ בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה, כּוּלּוֹ בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה וּמִקְצָתוֹ לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה — מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם, וְאִם רָצוּ — מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: According to this explanation, **we** already **learned** in the mishna **that** which **the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: If nearly **all of** the window **is above ten** handbreadths **and** only a small **part of it is within ten** handbreadths, or if nearly **all of it is within ten** handbreadths **and** only a small **part of it is above ten** handbreadths, **they establish two *eiruvin*, and if they desire, they** may **establish one *eiruv*.**


###### Eruvin 76a:14
[Eruvin 76a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:14)

הַשְׁתָּא כּוּלּוֹ לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה וּמִקְצָתוֹ בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה אָמְרַתְּ ״מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם וְאִם רָצוּ מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד״, כּוּלּוֹ בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה וּמִקְצָתוֹ לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה מִיבַּעְיָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The essential meaning of this *baraita* is clear, but the Gemara raises a question with regard to its formulation: **Now,** if nearly **all of it is above ten** handbreadths **and** only a small **part of it is within ten** handbreadths, **you said** that **they establish two *eiruvin*, and if they desire, they** may **establish one *eiruv*,** i.e., the window has the status of an opening and therefore the two courtyards may establish a joint *eiruv*, then **is it necessary** to state the *halakha* governing the case where almost **all of it is within ten and** only a small **part of it is above ten?**


###### Eruvin 76a:15
[Eruvin 76a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:15)

״זוֹ וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר זוֹ״ קָתָנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that indeed, this *baraita* **teaches** employing the style: **This, and it is unnecessary to say that,** moving from the more difficult and novel case to the easier, more straightforward one.


###### Eruvin 76a:16
[Eruvin 76a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:16)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: חַלּוֹן עָגוֹל צָרִיךְ שֶׁיְּהֵא בְּהֶיקֵּפוֹ עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים, וּשְׁנַיִם וּמַשֶּׁהוּ מֵהֶן בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה, שֶׁאִם יְרַבְּעֶנּוּ, נִמְצָא מַשֶּׁהוּ בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan said: A circular window must have a circumference of twenty-four handbreadths, with two and a bit of them within ten** handbreadths of the ground, **so that when he squares** the window, i.e., if he forms the shape of a square inside it, it measures four by four handbreadths, and **a bit** of it **is then within ten** handbreadths of the ground.


###### Eruvin 76a:17
[Eruvin 76a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/76a:17)

מִכְּדִי, כֹּל שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּהֶיקֵּפוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים — יֵשׁ בּוֹ בְּרוֹחְבּוֹ טֶפַח, בִּתְרֵיסַר סַגִּיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara poses a question with regard to this calculation: **Now, since** there is a general principle that **any** circle **with a circumference of three handbreadths is one handbreadth in diameter,** then according to this formula, a window with a circumference **of twelve** handbreadths, meaning that it has a diameter of four handbreadths, should be **sufficient** to create a window of four by four.