## Eruvin Daf 94a

###### Eruvin 94a:1
[Eruvin 94a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:1)

זֶה מְטַלְטֵל עַד עִיקַּר מְחִיצָה, וְזֶה מְטַלְטֵל עַד עִיקַּר מְחִיצָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**This** one **may carry to the base of the** former **partition, and that** one **may** likewise **carry to the base of the partition,** as he maintains that since it was permitted at the beginning of Shabbat, it remains permitted until the conclusion of Shabbat.


###### Eruvin 94a:2
[Eruvin 94a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:2)

וְהָא דְּרַב לָאו בְּפֵירוּשׁ אִתְּמַר, אֶלָּא מִכְּלָלָא אִתְּמַר. דְּרַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל הֲווֹ יָתְבִי בְּהָהוּא חָצֵר, נְפַל גּוּדָּא דְּבֵינֵי בֵּינֵי, אֲמַר לְהוּ שְׁמוּאֵל: שְׁקוּלוּ גְּלִימָא, נְגִידוּ בַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **And this** ruling **of Rav was not stated explicitly; rather, it was stated by inference;** i.e., it was inferred by his students from another one of his teachings. As once **Rav and Shmuel were sitting in a certain courtyard** on Shabbat, and **the wall between** the two courtyards **fell. Shmuel said to** the people around him: **Take a cloak** and **suspend it on** the remnant of the partition.


###### Eruvin 94a:3
[Eruvin 94a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:3)

אַהְדְּרִינְהוּ רַב לְאַפֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לְהוּ שְׁמוּאֵל: אִי קָפֵיד אַבָּא, שְׁקוּלוּ הֶמְיָינֵיהּ וּקְטַרוּ בָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav turned his face away,** displaying his displeasure with Shmuel’s opinion, as Rav maintained it was prohibited to carry a cloak in this courtyard. **Shmuel said to them** in a humorous vein: **If Abba,** Rav, **is particular, take his belt** and **tie it** to the cloak, to secure it to the partition.


###### Eruvin 94a:4
[Eruvin 94a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:4)

וְלִשְׁמוּאֵל לְמָה לִי הָא? הָא אָמַר: זֶה מְטַלְטֵל עַד עִיקַּר מְחִיצָה וְזֶה מְטַלְטֵל עַד עִיקַּר מְחִיצָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And according to Shmuel, why was it necessary** to suspend the cloak? He himself **said:** If a wall between two courtyards collapsed on Shabbat, **this** one **may carry to the base of the** former **partition, and that** one **may** likewise **carry to the base of the partition.**


###### Eruvin 94a:5
[Eruvin 94a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:5)

שְׁמוּאֵל עָבֵיד לִצְנִיעוּתָא בְּעָלְמָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Shmuel** did not **do** so to render it permitted to carry in the courtyard. He did so **merely for** the purpose of **privacy,** as he did not want the residents of the other courtyard to see into his own courtyard.


###### Eruvin 94a:6
[Eruvin 94a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:6)

וְרַב, אִי סְבִירָא לֵיהּ דַּאֲסִיר — לֵימָא לֵיהּ! אַתְרֵיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל הֲוָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And Rav, if he maintains that** in this case carrying is **prohibited, he should have said** so **to him** explicitly. The Gemara answers: **It was Shmuel’s place.** Rav did not want to disagree with his colleague in his jurisdiction, as he accepted the opinion of the local authority.


###### Eruvin 94a:7
[Eruvin 94a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:7)

אִי הָכִי, מַאי טַעְמָא אַהְדְּרִינְהוּ לְאַפֵּיהּ? דְּלָא נֵימְרוּ כִּשְׁמוּאֵל סְבִירָא לֵיהּ (וַהֲדַר בֵּיהּ מִשְּׁמַעְתֵּיהּ).

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so,** if he accepted the jurisdiction of the local rabbinic authority, **why did he turn his face away?** The Gemara answers: He acted in this manner so **that** people would **not say** that **he holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Shmuel, and** that **he retracted his** opinion with regard to this ***halakha*.**


###### Eruvin 94a:8
[Eruvin 94a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:8)

**מַתְנִי׳** חָצֵר שֶׁנִּפְרְצָה לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים — הַמַּכְנִיס מִתּוֹכָהּ לִרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד, אוֹ מֵרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד לְתוֹכָהּ — חַיָּיב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **a courtyard that was breached into the public domain,** and the breach was more than ten cubits wide, so that it cannot be considered an entrance, **one who carries** an object **from inside** the courtyard **into the private domain, or from the private domain into it, is liable,** as it ceases to be a private domain and is subsumed into the public domain. This is **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer.**


###### Eruvin 94a:9
[Eruvin 94a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:9)

וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: מִתּוֹכָהּ לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים אוֹ מֵרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְתוֹכָהּ — פָּטוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כְּכַרְמְלִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the Rabbis** disagree and **say:** One who carries **from inside** the courtyard **into the public domain, or from the public domain into it, is exempt, because its** legal status **is like** that of **a *karmelit*.** Although it ceases to be a private domain, it does not become a full-fledged public domain.


###### Eruvin 94a:10
[Eruvin 94a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:10)

**גְּמָ׳** וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, מִשּׁוּם דְּנִפְרְצָה לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים הָוְיָא לַהּ רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים?! אִין, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר לְטַעְמֵיהּ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **And** according to **Rabbi Eliezer, due to** the fact that the courtyard **was breached into the public domain,** does **it become the public domain?** The Gemara answers: **Yes,** as in this regard the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer** conforms **to his** standard line of **reasoning.**


###### Eruvin 94a:11
[Eruvin 94a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:11)

דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: רַבִּים שֶׁבֵּרְרוּ דֶּרֶךְ לְעַצְמָן, מַה שֶּׁבֵּרְרוּ בֵּרְרוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer:** In a situation where the **multitudes selected a path for themselves** in a field, or between fields, the path **that they selected, they selected,** and they retain the right to traverse this path even if the place belongs to an individual. Here too, as the partition of the courtyard was breached to the extent that the public can enter, its status is that of a public domain.


###### Eruvin 94a:12
[Eruvin 94a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:12)

אִינִי?! וְהָאָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב: וְהוּא שֶׁאָבְדָה לָהֶן דֶּרֶךְ בְּאוֹתוֹ שָׂדֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara expresses surprise at this opinion: **Is that so? But didn’t Rav Giddel say** that **Rav said: And this** applies only **if they had misplaced a path in that field.** Generally speaking, the public does not have the right to establish a path wherever it chooses. The *baraita* is referring to a case where a public path used to run through that field, but it fell into disuse, and no one remembers its precise course. In this case the public may once again select a path through the field.


###### Eruvin 94a:13
[Eruvin 94a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:13)

וְכִי תֵּימָא: הָכָא נָמֵי כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָבְדָה לָהֶן דֶּרֶךְ בְּאוֹתָהּ חָצֵר, וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: עַד מְקוֹם מְחִיצָה מַחֲלוֹקֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say: Here too,** the mishna is dealing with a case **where** the public **misplaced a path in that courtyard.** They do not remember the exact position of the partition that once separated the courtyard and the public domain. The public claims that the residents of the courtyard appropriated that part of their domain. It is only this area that Rabbi Eliezer says is considered a public domain. The Gemara asks: **But didn’t Rabbi Ḥanina say:** The **dispute** between Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis is with regard to the entire courtyard **to [ad] the place of** the fallen **partition,** not only the small section that might have been a public path.


###### Eruvin 94a:14
[Eruvin 94a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:14)

אֵימָא: עַל מְקוֹם מְחִיצָה מַחֲלוֹקֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **Say** that Rabbi Ḥanina stated that Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis **disagree over [*al*] the place of** the **partition,** i.e., the dispute does not concern the entire courtyard, but only the former location of the partition, where a public path might once have passed.


###### Eruvin 94a:15
[Eruvin 94a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:15)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא, בְּצִידֵּי רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים קָמִיפַּלְגִי, דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר סָבַר: צִידֵּי רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים — כִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים דָּמוּ, וְרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי צִידֵּי רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים — לָאו כִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים דָּמוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead that the mishna is dealing with a case where the location of the original partition is known, and the *tanna’im* **disagree with regard to** the legal status of **the sides of a public domain. As Rabbi Eliezer maintains** that **the sides of a public domain are considered like a public domain,** i.e., the areas adjacent to the public domain are subsumed into the public domain. The same applies to the place of the partition that once separated the courtyard and the public domain but was breached. **And the Rabbis maintain** that **the sides of a public domain are not considered like a public domain.**


###### Eruvin 94a:16
[Eruvin 94a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:16)

וְלִיפְלוֹג בְּצִידֵּי רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים בְּעָלְמָא? אִי אִיפְּלִיגוּ בְּצִידֵּי רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים בְּעָלְמָא, הֲוָה אָמְרִינַן: כִּי פְּלִיגִי רַבָּנַן עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר — הָנֵי מִילֵּי הֵיכָא דְּאִיכָּא חִיפּוּפֵי, אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּלֵיכָּא חִיפּוּפֵי — אֵימָא מוֹדוּ לֵיהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If so, **let them disagree with regard to the sides of a public domain in general;** why did they disagree about this particular case? The Gemara answers: **Had they disagreed with regard to the sides of a public domain in general, we would have said: When do the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Eliezer? This** dispute **applies only where there are stakes** alongside the houses, which interfere with the use of the sides of the public domain. **However, where there are no** such **stakes, say** that **they concede to him** that the sides of a public domain are considered like a public domain. By formulating the dispute with regard to a courtyard that was breached into the public domain, the mishna is **teaching us** that they disagree in all cases.


###### Eruvin 94a:17
[Eruvin 94a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:17)

וְהָא ״מִתּוֹכָהּ״ קָאָמַר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **But didn’t** Rabbi Eliezer **say** with regard to a courtyard that was breached into the public domain, that one who carries an object **from inside** the courtyard into the private domain is liable? Apparently, he is liable if he carries an article into the private domain from anywhere in the courtyard, not only from the area adjacent to the public domain, as the entire courtyard is considered a public domain.


###### Eruvin 94a:18
[Eruvin 94a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:18)

אַיְּידֵי דַּאֲמוּר רַבָּנַן ״מִתּוֹכָהּ״, אָמַר אִיהוּ נָמֵי ״מִתּוֹכָהּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **As the Rabbis said: From inside** the courtyard, Rabbi Eliezer **also said: From inside** the courtyard. No conclusion can be inferred from his use of the term, as he was referring only to the section adjacent to the public domain.


###### Eruvin 94a:19
[Eruvin 94a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:19)

וְרַבָּנַן, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר צִידֵּי רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, וּמַהְדְּרוּ לֵיהּ אִינְהוּ ״מִתּוֹכָהּ״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But,** if that is the case, the statement of **the Rabbis** is difficult. **Rabbi Eliezer said** that the legal status of **the sides of the public domain** is like that of a public domain, **and they replied to him** by referring to: **From inside** the entire courtyard? They appear to be addressing two different cases.


###### Eruvin 94a:20
[Eruvin 94a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:20)

הָכִי קָאָמְרִי לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: מִי לָא קָא מוֹדֵית לַן הֵיכָא דְּטִילְטֵל מִתּוֹכָהּ לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, וּמֵרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְתוֹכָהּ — דְּפָטוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כַּרְמְלִית? צִידֵּי נָמֵי לָא שְׁנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **This is what the Rabbis are saying to Rabbi Eliezer: Don’t you concede to us** with regard to a case **where he carried** an object **from inside** the courtyard **to the public domain, or from the public domain to** the courtyard, **that** he is **exempt, because** the courtyard **is** considered **like a *karmelit*? The sides** of the public domain are **no different,** and should have the status of a *karmelit* **as well.**


###### Eruvin 94a:21
[Eruvin 94a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:21)

וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, הָתָם לָא קָא דָרְסִי לַהּ רַבִּים, הָכָא קָא דָרְסִי לַהּ רַבִּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** how does **Rabbi Eliezer** counter this argument? **There, the public does not tread on** the courtyard; **here,** the **public treads on** the edge of the courtyard adjacent to the public domain, and therefore its status is that of a public domain in every sense.


###### Eruvin 94a:22
[Eruvin 94a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:22)

**מַתְנִי׳** חָצֵר שֶׁנִּפְרְצָה לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים מִשְׁתֵּי רוּחוֹתֶיהָ, וְכֵן בַּיִת שֶׁנִּפְרַץ מִשְׁתֵּי רוּחוֹתָיו, וְכֵן מָבוֹי שֶׁנִּטְּלוּ קוֹרוֹתָיו אוֹ לְחָיָיו — מוּתָּרִים בְּאוֹתוֹ שַׁבָּת, וַאֲסוּרִים לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **a courtyard that was breached** on Shabbat **into a public domain from two** of **its sides, and likewise** with regard to **a house that was breached from two** of **its sides, and likewise** with regard to **an alleyway whose** cross **beams or side posts were removed** on Shabbat, the residents of that domain **are permitted** to carry there **on that Shabbat, but are prohibited** from doing so **in the future.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Eruvin 94a:23
[Eruvin 94a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:23)

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אִם מוּתָּרִין לְאוֹתוֹ שַׁבָּת — מוּתָּרִין לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא, וְאִם אֲסוּרִין לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא — אֲסוּרִין לְאוֹתוֹ שַׁבָּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yosei says:** This cannot be the *halakha*, as **if they are permitted** to carry there **on that Shabbat, they are** likewise **permitted** to do so **in the future, and if they are prohibited** from carrying there **in the future, they are** also **prohibited** from carrying there **on that Shabbat.**


###### Eruvin 94a:24
[Eruvin 94a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:24)

**גְּמָ׳** בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? אִילֵימָא בְּעֶשֶׂר, מַאי שְׁנָא מֵרוּחַ אַחַת דְּאָמַר פִּיתְחָא הוּא, מִשְׁתֵּי רוּחוֹת נָמֵי פִּיתְחָא הוּא! אֶלָּא בְּיָתֵר מֵעֶשֶׂר, אִי הָכִי — אֲפִילּוּ מֵרוּחַ אַחַת נָמֵי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara poses a question: **With what** case **are we dealing? If you say** the mishna is referring to a case **where** the breach was up to **ten** cubits wide, in **what** way **is** a breach **on** only **one side different?** It is due to the fact **that we say: It is an entrance** rather than a breach, and carrying is therefore permitted. If so, if it was breached **on two sides as well,** say: **It is an entrance,** and there are entrances on two sides of the courtyard. **Rather,** the mishna is certainly dealing **with** a breach that is **greater than ten** cubits. **If so,** it should be prohibited to carry **even** if the courtyard was breached **on** only **one side,** as a breach that size negates all the partitions.


###### Eruvin 94a:25
[Eruvin 94a:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Eruvin/r/94a:25)

אָמַר רַב: לְעוֹלָם בְּעֶשֶׂר,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav said: Actually,** the mishna is dealing **with** a breach that is no wider than **ten** cubits,