## Eruvin Daf 76b

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

הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּעִיגּוּלָא, אֲבָל בְּרִיבּוּעָא בָּעִינַן טְפֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**This** measurement **applies** only **to a circle** and the ratio between its circumference and diameter, **but with regard to a square** that must fit entirely within that circle, **we require** a circle with a **larger** circumference. In order for a square of four by four handbreadths to be entirely contained within a circle, the circumference of the circle must measure more than twelve handbreadths


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

מִכְּדֵי, כַּמָּה מְרוּבָּע יָתֵר עַל הֶעָגוֹל — רְבִיעַ, בְּשִׁיתְסַר סַגִּיא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Now, how much larger is a square than a circle?** It is larger by **one quarter.** If so, a circle **with** a circumference of **sixteen** handbreadths at most should **suffice.**


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

הָנֵי מִילֵּי עִיגּוּלָא דְּנָפֵיק מִגּוֹ רִיבּוּעָא. אֲבָל רִיבּוּעָא דְּנָפֵיק מִגּוֹ עִיגּוּלָא, בָּעִינַן טְפֵי. מַאי טַעְמָא? מִשּׁוּם מוּרְשָׁא דְקַרְנָתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **This** statement that a square is larger than a circle by a quarter **applies** only **to a circle circumscribed by a square, but** with regard to **a square circumscribed by a circle, we require more,** and the difference between the square and the circle is greater. **What is the reason** for this? It is **due to the projection of the corners** of the square, as the distance from the center of the square to its corners is greater than the distance from the center to its sides.


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

מִכְּדֵי, כׇּל אַמְּתָא בְּרִיבּוּעַ — אַמְּתָא וּתְרֵי חוּמְּשֵׁי בַּאֲלַכְסוֹנָא, בְּשֵׁיבְסַר נְכֵי חוּמְשָׁא סַגִּיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further objects: **Since every cubit in** the side of **a square** is **a cubit and two-fifths in the diagonal,** a square of four by four handbreadths has a diagonal of five and three-fifths handbreadths. And since the diameter of a circle equals the diagonal of the square that it encompasses, the circle circumscribing a square of four by four handbreadths has a diameter of five and three-fifths handbreadths. If that measure is multiplied by three to arrive at the circumference of that circle, the result is that a circle with a circumference of **seventeen handbreadths minus a fifth is sufficient** to circumscribe a square of four by four handbreadths. Why, then, does Rabbi Yoḥanan say that a circular window must have a circumference of twenty-four handbreadths?


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

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר כִּי דַּיָּינֵי דְקֵיסָרִי, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ כְּרַבָּנַן דְקֵיסָרִי, דְּאָמְרִי: עִיגּוּלָא מִגּוֹ רִיבּוּעָא — רִיבְעָא, רִיבּוּעָא מִגּוֹ עִיגּוּלָא — פַּלְגָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rabbi Yoḥanan spoke in accordance with** the opinion of **the judges of Caesarea, and some say in accordance with** the opinion of **the Sages of Caesarea, who say: A circle** that is circumscribed **within a square** is smaller than it by **one quarter;** with regard to **a square** that is circumscribed **within a circle,** the difference between them is equal to **half** the square. According to this explanation, Rabbi Yoḥanan calculated as follows: Since a square of four by four handbreadths has a perimeter of sixteen handbreadths, the circumference of the circle that encompasses it must be fifty percent larger, or twenty-four handbreadths.


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

פָּחוֹת מֵאַרְבָּעָה עַל אַרְבָּעָה וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא חַלּוֹן שֶׁבֵּין שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵירוֹת, אֲבָל חַלּוֹן שֶׁבֵּין שְׁנֵי בָתִּים אֲפִילּוּ לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה נָמֵי, אִם רָצוּ לְעָרֵב — מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד. מַאי טַעְמָא? בֵּיתָא כְּמַאן דִּמְלֵי דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It was taught in the mishna: If a window is **less than four by four** handbreadths, or if it is above ten handbreadths from the ground, the residents of the two courtyards may not establish one joint *eiruv* but must instead establish two independent ones. **Rav Naḥman said: They taught** this *halakha* of a window within ten handbreadths of the ground **only** with regard to **a window between two courtyards. But** with regard to **a window between two houses, even** if it is **above ten** handbreadths **as well, if they wish to establish an *eiruv*, they establish one *eiruv*. What is the reason** for this *halakha*? It is that **a house is considered as though it** were **filled,** and therefore there is no difference between below and above ten handbreadths with regard to a window in a house.


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

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: אֶחָד לִי חַלּוֹן שֶׁבֵּין שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵירוֹת, וְאֶחָד לִי חַלּוֹן שֶׁבֵּין שְׁנֵי בָתִּים, וְאֶחָד לִי חַלּוֹן שֶׁבֵּין שְׁתֵּי עֲלִיּוֹת, וְאֶחָד לִי חַלּוֹן שֶׁבֵּין שְׁנֵי גַגִּין, וְאֶחָד לִי חַלּוֹן שֶׁבֵּין שְׁנֵי חֲדָרִים — כּוּלָּן אַרְבָּעָה עַל אַרְבָּעָה בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava raised an objection to** the opinion of **Rav Naḥman** from that which was taught in a *baraita*: **A window between two courtyards, and a window between two houses, and a window between two attics, and a window between two roofs, and a window between two rooms are all one and the same to me; they all** must be **four by four** handbreadths and **within ten** handbreadths from the ground. This directly contradicts Rav Naḥman’s opinion.


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

תַּרְגּוּמָא אַחֲצֵירוֹת. וְהָא ״אֶחָד לִי״ קָתָנֵי! תַּרְגּוּמָא אַאַרְבָּעָה עַל אַרְבָּעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Explain** that this *halakha* of ten handbreadths mentioned in the *baraita* is referring only to **courtyards.** The Gemara objects: **Doesn’t** the *baraita* **teach: Are all one and the same to me,** indicating that they are all equal in this regard? Rather, **explain** that they are all equal in that the window must be the size of **four by four** handbreadths, but not that all must be within ten handbreadths of the ground.


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

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי אַבָּא מֵרַב נַחְמָן: לוּל הַפָּתוּחַ מִן בַּיִת לַעֲלִיָּיה, צָרִיךְ סוּלָּם קָבוּעַ לְהַתִּירוֹ אוֹ אֵין צָרִיךְ סוּלָּם קָבוּעַ לְהַתִּירוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Abba raised a dilemma before Rav Naḥman:** With regard to **an aperture that opens from** the ceiling of **a house** occupied by one person **to an attic** occupied by another, **must a permanent ladder** be positioned in the opening **to render** carrying from one level to the other **permitted** by turning the two into a single residence? **Or, is a permanent ladder not necessary to render it permitted?**


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

כִּי אָמְרִינַן בֵּיתָא כְּמַאן דִּמְלֵי דָּמֵי — הָנֵי מִילֵּי מִן הַצַּד, אֲבָל בָּאֶמְצַע — לָא, אוֹ דִילְמָא לָא שְׁנָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies the two sides of the question: **When we say** that **a house is considered as though it** were **filled,** does **this apply** only to a window positioned **on the side, but not** to a window **in the middle?** In that case, the opening would not be viewed as near the full part of the house, and a permanent ladder would be required. **Or perhaps there is no difference,** and since the house is considered filled, no ladder is necessary.


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

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ. סְבוּר מִינָּה: סוּלָּם קָבוּעַ הוּא דְּאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ, הָא סוּלָּם עֲרַאי — צָרִיךְ. אִיתְּמַר, אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף בַּר מִנְיוֹמֵי אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: אֶחָד סוּלָּם קָבוּעַ וְאֶחָד סוּלָּם עֲרַאי — אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Naḥman **said to him: It is not necessary.** The Sages **understood from** this response that he meant that **a permanent ladder is not required, but a temporary ladder is required.** However, **it is stated** in this regard: **Rav Yosef bar Manyumi said** that **Rav Naḥman said: Neither a permanent ladder nor a temporary ladder is required,** as the fact that the opening is located within the house is sufficient to render it permitted to carry from the house to the attic.


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

**מַתְנִי׳** כּוֹתֶל שֶׁבֵּין שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵירוֹת, גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה וְרוֹחַב אַרְבָּעָה — מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If **a wall between two courtyards is ten** handbreadths **high and four** handbreadths **wide,** the residents of the courtyard **establish two *eiruvin*,** a separate one for each courtyard, **but they** may **not establish one *eiruv*.**


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

הָיוּ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ פֵּירוֹת — אֵלּוּ עוֹלִין מִכָּאן וְאוֹכְלִין, וְאֵלּוּ עוֹלִין מִכָּאן וְאוֹכְלִין, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יוֹרִידוּ לְמַטָּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If there was produce on top** of the wall, **these** residents of one courtyard **may ascend from this side and eat** from it, **and those** residents of the other courtyard **may ascend from that side and eat** from it, **provided that they do not lower** the produce **down** from on top of the wall to one of the courtyards.


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

נִפְרְצָה הַכּוֹתֶל, עַד עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת — מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם, וְאִם רָצוּ מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּפֶתַח. יוֹתֵר מִכָּאן — מְעָרְבִין אֶחָד וְאֵין מְעָרְבִין שְׁנַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If the wall was breached,** the following distinction applies: If the breach was **up to ten cubits** wide, **they establish two *eiruvin*, and if they desire, they** may **establish one *eiruv*, as it is similar to an entrance,** like any opening less than ten cubits wide. If the breach was **more than this, they establish one *eiruv*, and they** may **not establish two,** as a breach of this size nullifies the partition and joins the two courtyards into a single domain.


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

**גְּמָ׳** אֵין בּוֹ אַרְבָּעָה מַאי? אָמַר רַב: אֲוִיר שְׁתֵּי רְשׁוּיוֹת שׁוֹלֶטֶת בּוֹ, לֹא יָזִיז בּוֹ אֲפִילּוּ מְלֹא נִימָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: If this wall **is not four** handbreadths in width, **what** is the *halakha*? **Rav said:** In this case, **the air of two domains controls it.** Since the wall is not broad enough to be regarded a domain of its own, the top of the wall is seen as belonging to both courtyards and is then prohibited to both of them. Accordingly, **one may not move** anything **on** top of the wall, **even** as much as **a hair’s breadth.**