## Eruvin Daf 86b

###### Eruvin 86b:1
[Eruvin 86b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:1)

קוֹרָה אַרְבָּעָה מַתֶּרֶת בְּמַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
A cross **beam of four** handbreadths laid across a cistern located between two courtyards **permits** one to draw **water** from that cistern.


###### Eruvin 86b:2
[Eruvin 86b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:2)

הָא קָא אָזֵיל דְּלִי לְאִידַּךְ גִּיסָא, וּמַיְיתֵי? קִים לְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן דְּאֵין דְּלִי מְהַלֵּךְ יוֹתֵר מֵאַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With this in mind, the following difficulty arises: The **bucket** he uses to draw the water **might drift** under the cross **beam to the other side** of the cistern **and bring** water from the other courtyard. The Gemara answers: **The Sages have established that a bucket does not drift more than four handbreadths** from the point where it was lowered, and it will therefore stay on its original side of the partition.


###### Eruvin 86b:3
[Eruvin 86b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:3)

תַּחַת קוֹרָה מִיהָא הָא עֲרִיבִי מַיָּא! אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּקַל הוּא שֶׁהֵקֵילּוּ חֲכָמִים בְּמַיִם. כְּדִבְעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי טַבְלָא מֵרַב: מְחִיצָה תְּלוּיָה, מַהוּ שֶׁתַּתִּיר בְּחוּרְבָּה? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֵין מְחִיצָה תְּלוּיָה מַתֶּרֶת אֶלָּא בְּמַיִם, קַל הוּא שֶׁהֵקֵילּוּ חֲכָמִים בַּמַּיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **Nonetheless, the water becomes intermingled under the** cross **beam,** and consequently the bucket will bring up water from the other courtyard. **Rather,** it must be that the reason for the leniency is not that the cross beam actually prevents the flow of the water, but **because the Sages were lenient with regard to water.** They allowed a partition suspended above the water to be considered as though it blocked the flow of the water. **As Rav Tavla asked of Rav:** With regard to **a suspended partition, does it permit** carrying **in a ruin?** Do we say that the remnants of the walls suspended in the air are considered as though they descended to the ground and closed off the area, thereby rendering it a private domain? Rav **said to him: A suspended partition** of this kind **permits** carrying **only** in the case **of water,** as **the Sages were lenient with regard to water.**


###### Eruvin 86b:4
[Eruvin 86b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:4)

אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, לֹא תְּהֵא מְחִיצָה. אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּשִׁיטַת רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אֲמָרָהּ, דְּאָמַר: מְחִיצָה תְּלוּיָה מַתֶּרֶת אֲפִילּוּ בַּיַּבָּשָׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: **Rabbi Yehuda said:** There is no need for a partition in the cistern, as **a partition** inside a cistern **is no** better than the wall above it. **Rabba bar bar Ḥana said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabbi Yehuda stated this in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who said: A suspended partition permits** carrying **even on land,** as it is considered as though it descended to the ground and sealed off the area. Accordingly, there is no need to erect a partition inside the airspace of a cistern.


###### Eruvin 86b:5
[Eruvin 86b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:5)

דִּתְנַן: הַמְשַׁלְשֵׁל דְּפָנוֹת מִלְּמַעְלָה לְמַטָּה, בִּזְמַן שֶׁגְּבוֹהוֹת מִן הָאָרֶץ שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים — פְּסוּלָה. מִמַּטָּה לְמַעְלָה, אִם גְּבוֹהוֹת עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים — כְּשֵׁירָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As we learned** in a mishna: **One who lowers** *sukka* **walls from above** going **downward, when** the walls **are three handbreadths higher than the ground,** the *sukka* **is invalid,** as they are not considered partitions; but if he constructed walls **from below** going **upward, if they are ten handbreadths high** the *sukka* **is valid,** even if they do not reach the roofing.


###### Eruvin 86b:6
[Eruvin 86b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:6)

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמִּלְּמַטָּה לְמַעְלָה עֲשָׂרָה, כָּךְ מִלְּמַעְלָה לְמַטָּה עֲשָׂרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yosei,** however, **says: Just as** with regard to walls constructed **from below** going **upward, ten** handbreadths suffice, **so** too, in the case of walls built **from above** going **downward, ten** handbreadths are enough for it to be considered a whole wall, even if it more than three handbreadths above the ground. Similarly, Rabbi Yehuda maintains that a partition suspended above a cistern is considered as though it descended and sealed off the area.


###### Eruvin 86b:7
[Eruvin 86b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:7)

וְלָא הִיא, לָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְלָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **But this is not so,** for we can distinguish between the two opinions and claim that **neither Rabbi Yehuda holds** in accordance **with Rabbi Yosei, nor does Rabbi Yosei hold** in accordance **with Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Eruvin 86b:8
[Eruvin 86b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:8)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה לָא סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי: עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אֶלָּא בְּעֵירוּבֵי חֲצֵירוֹת דְּרַבָּנַן, אֲבָל סוּכָּה דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **Rabbi Yehuda does not** necessarily **hold** in accordance **with Rabbi Yosei,** as a distinction can be made between the two cases. **Rabbi Yehuda stated** his opinion **only with regard to the joining of courtyards,** which are required **by rabbinic law, but** in the case of **a *sukka*, which** is required **by Torah law, no,** he did not say that we can rely on suspended partitions.


###### Eruvin 86b:9
[Eruvin 86b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:9)

וְלָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה: עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אֶלָּא בְּסוּכָּה דְּאִיסּוּר עֲשֵׂה הוּא, אֲבָל שַׁבָּת דְּאִיסּוּר סְקִילָה הוּא — לֹא אָמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** conversely, **Rabbi Yosei does not** necessarily **hold** in accordance **with Rabbi Yehuda,** as **Rabbi Yosei stated** his opinion **only with regard to a *sukka*,** which **is a prohibition** stated in the Torah **from a positive commandment.** The prohibition is not written as a negative commandment, but it can be inferred from a positive commandment. Neglect of the positive commandment of *sukka* is not punishable by the court, therefore we are not stringent in this regard. **But** with regard to **Shabbat,** which is **a prohibition** punishable **by stoning,** Rabbi Yosei **did not state** his opinion. Consequently, Rabbi Yosei might agree that we must be very stringent with regard to all *halakhot* of Shabbat, even those that are rabbinic in origin.


###### Eruvin 86b:10
[Eruvin 86b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:10)

וְאִם תֹּאמַר: אוֹתוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה בְּצִיפּוֹרִי, עַל פִּי מִי נַעֲשָׂה? לֹא עַל פִּי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אֶלָּא עַל פִּי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי נַעֲשָׂה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you ask: That incident, which occurred in Tzippori,** when they relied on suspended partitions on land for Shabbat, **on whose authority was it performed?** It was done **not on the authority of Rabbi Yosei, but** rather **it was performed on the authority of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei,** who maintains that a suspended partition renders it permitted to carry even if it is over land and even on Shabbat.


###### Eruvin 86b:11
[Eruvin 86b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:11)

דְּכִי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר: פַּעַם אַחַת שָׁכְחוּ וְלֹא הֵבִיאוּ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם. לְמָחָר פָּרְסוּ סָדִין עַל הָעַמּוּדִים, וְהֵבִיאוּ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וְקָרְאוּ בּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The incident transpired in the following manner. **As when Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, **he said:** It **once** happened that the people **forgot and did not bring a Torah scroll** to the synagogue on Friday **while it was still day,** which meant they were left without a scroll from which to read on Shabbat. **On the following day,** Shabbat, **they spread a sheet over the pillars** positioned between the house where the scroll was kept and the synagogue, thereby forming a corridor with partitions suspended on each side. **And** in this manner **they brought the Torah scroll** to the synagogue **and read from it.**


###### Eruvin 86b:12
[Eruvin 86b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:12)

פָּרְסוּ?! לְכַתְּחִילָּה מִי שְׁרֵי? וְהָא הַכֹּל מוֹדִים שֶׁאֵין עוֹשִׂין אֹהֶל עֲרַאי בְּשַׁבָּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara expresses surprise at the wording of this account: Did they actually **spread** sheets on Shabbat? **Is it permitted** to do so ***ab initio*? But doesn’t everyone agree that one may not erect a temporary tent on Shabbat** *ab initio*? Spreading sheets over pillars is considered constructing a temporary tent.


###### Eruvin 86b:13
[Eruvin 86b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:13)

אֶלָּא: מָצְאוּ סְדִינִין פְּרוּסִין עַל הָעַמּוּדִים, וְהֵבִיאוּ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וְקָרְאוּ בּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** what happened was that **they found sheets spread over the pillars,** which they used as partitions, **and** in this manner **they brought the Torah scroll** to the synagogue **and read from it.**


###### Eruvin 86b:14
[Eruvin 86b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/86b:14)

אָמַר רַבָּה: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן עֲקַבְיָא אָמְרוּ דָּבָר אֶחָד. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, הָא דַּאֲמַרַן. רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן עֲקַבְיָא, (דִּתְנַן) רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן עֲקַבְיָא אוֹמֵר: גְּזוּזְטְרָא שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת עַל אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said: Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Ḥananya ben Akavya said the same thing.** Both were very lenient with regard to the *halakha* of a partition over water. The ruling of **Rabbi Yehuda is that which we** just **said,** that the wall of the courtyard permits a cistern. The ruling of **Rabbi Ḥananya ben Akavya is as we learned: Rabbi Ḥananya ben Akavya says:** In the case of **a balcony that contains four cubits by four cubits,** which is suspended over water,