## Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin Chapter 2

###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:1)

**משנה:** עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין לַבֵּירָאוֹת אַרְבָּעָה דְיוֹמְדִין נִרְאִין כִּשְׁמוֹנָה דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר שְׁמוֹנָה נִרְאִין כִּשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר. אַרְבָּעָה דְיוֹמְדִין וְאַרְבָּעָה פְשׁוּטִין גּוֹבְהָן עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים וְרוֹחְבָּן שִׁשָׁה וְעוֹבְיָין כָּל שֶׁהוּא וּבֵינֵיהֶן כִּמְלוֹא שְׁתֵּי רְבָקוֹת שֶׁל שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁלֹשׁ בָּקָר דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר שֶׁל אַרְבַּע אַרְבַּע קְשׁוּרוֹת וְלֹא מוּתָּרוֹת אַחַת נִכְנֶסֶת וְאַחַת יוֹצֵאת:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** One makes planks for wells, four double columns¹, the well or cistern is private domain if it is at least 10 hand-breadths deep. Therefore one has to see to it that the animals drink in a private domain. R. Meïr requires a straight plank (of indeterminate width) after a 5 cubits opening. which look like eight, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Meïr says eight which look like twelve, eight double columns and four simple ones, their height ten [hand-breadths], and their width six, and their thickness arbitrary. And between them the width of two teams of three cattle each, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says of four each, tied together rather than loose, one entering and one leaving².

footnotes:
¹ The word seems to be a Greek-Hebrew hybrid, δύο-עֲמוּדִים “double column”. The circular well is in the middle of a square; at each corner one erects planks 10 hand-breadths high and on each side 6 wide. Since from each side one sees two planks, these are “4 looking like 8”. Since the opening between two planks, space in excess of the width of 6 cows for R. Meïr or eight for R. Jehudah, is more than what is permitted as opening of a wall of a private domain, special rules are needed to permit grazing animals to drink from a well. Even though the meadows on which they are grazing is public domain or karmelit
² As explained at the end of the discussion of this Mishnah, the space between two planks can be 10 cubits for R. Meïr and almost 14 for R. Jehudah.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:2)

**הלכה:** עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין לַבֵּירָאוֹת כול׳. לְפִי שֶׁהַפָּרוּץ רָבָה עַל הָעוֹמֵד הוּא עוֹשֶׁה דִיוֹמְדִין. אַבָל לֹא פְשׁוּטִין. אוֹף הוּא מוֹכִיחַ עַל עַצְמוֹ מִשּׁוּם הוֹלָכַת הַבְּאֵר. רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. הִגִּיעוּךָ סוֹף תְּחוּמֵי שַׁבָּת עַד אֵיכָן הֵן. שֶׁאִם עָשָׂה כֵן בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד וְחָזַר וְזָרַק אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. חַיָיב. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. לְפִי שֶׁבְּכָל מָקוֹם עוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ. וְכָאן הֵיקַלְתָּה עָלָיו שֶׁיְּהֵא הַפָּרוּץ רָבָה עַל הָעוֹמֵד. הֶחֱמַרְתָּה עָלָיו בְּדָבָר אַחֵר. שֶׁבְּכָל מָקוֹם עוֹשֶׂה פַס שֶׁלְאַרְבַּע טְפָחִים וְכָאן עוֹשֶׂה פַס שֶׁלְשִׁשָּׁה טְפָחִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** “One makes planks for wells,” etc. Since what is breached is more than what is standing he makes double columns but not simple ones, which proves by itself that it is because of access to the well. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: You are reaching here what are the limits of domains of the Sabbath, for if he did so at (one)¹⁷ place and then threw there four cubits in the public domain he would be liable. Rebbi Yose said, since you were lenient with him about what is breached may be more than what is standing, you are strict with him in another matter since everywhere else one makes a plank of four hand- breadths but here he makes a plank of six hand-breadths¹⁸.

footnotes:
¹⁷ With the later prints of the Yerushalmi one has to read here אַחֵר “another”. If one puts up four double-planks anywhere else so that the opening is wider than the standing walls it does not mean anything. If within this space one throws something more than 4 cubits it is throwing in the public domain and a Sabbath violation. The Babli 20a reads differently.
¹⁸ Both aspects, the corner planks and their width, are required to make it clear that these rules are valid exclusively for water sources but nothing else.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:3)

רַב יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רַב. לֹא הִתִּירוּ פַּסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת אֶלָּא לְעוֹלֵי רְגָלִים בִּלְבַד. רַב אַבִּין אָמַר. בִּשְׁעַת עוֹלֵי רְגָלִים. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק. מִפְּנֵי עוֹלֵי רְגָלִים. אָמַר רִבִּי עֶזְרָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. מַתְנִיתַא אָמְרָה כֵן. עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין לְבֵירִיוֹת בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. מְמַלְּין מִבּוֹר הַגּוֹלָה בַּגַּלְגַּל בַּשַּׁבָּת מִבּוֹר הַגָּדוֹל כול׳. מִפְּנֵי מַה מְמַלִּין מִבְּאֵר הַקַּר בַּגַּלְגַּל בְּיוֹם טוֹב. אֶלָּא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁעָלָה יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן הַגּוֹלָה וְחָנוּ עַל אוֹתָהּ הַבְּאֵר. וְהִתָנוּ עִמָּהֵן הַנְּבִיאִים שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶן שֶׁיְּהוּ מְמַלִּין מִבְּאֵר הַקַּר בַּגַּלְגַּל בְּיוֹם טוֹב. לֹא כָל בְּאֵרוֹת הַקַּר הִתִּירוּ. אֶלָּא אוֹתָהּ הַבְּאֵר שֶׁחָנוּ עָלֶיהָ בִּלְבַד. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר תַּמָּן. מַה שֶׁהוּתָּר הוּתָּר וָכֹה שֶׁהוּתָּר הוּתָּר. רִבִּי אֶבְדַיְמָא דְחֵיפָא הּוֹרֵי בְחֵיפָא. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה הוֹרֵי בְחֶלֶף בְּפַסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: They permitted planks for wells only for pilgrims¹⁹. Rav Abin said, at the time of pilgrimage²⁰. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: Because of the pilgrims²¹. Rebbi Ezra said before Rebbi Mana, the Mishnah implies that one makes planks for wells in the present time²². But did we not state²³, “one fills from the cistern of the diaspora with a wheel on the Sabbath, from the large cistern, etc.” Why “may one fill from the cold well²⁴ with a wheel on the holiday”? But at the time when Israel came from the diaspora and camped at this well, the prophets among them stipulated that that one could fill from the cold well with a wheel on the holiday²⁵. They did not permit all cold wells, only this well at which they camped. As you are saying there, what was permitted was permitted, and here what was permitted was permitted. Rebbi Eudaimon from Haifa instructed in Haifa, Rebbi Jeremiah instructed in Ḥelef about planks for wells in the present time²⁶.

footnotes:
¹⁹ The three yearly pilgrimages to the Temple. This implies that after the destruction of the Temple all the rules of the present Chapter became obsolete. Babli 20b as accepted doctrine.
²⁰ The suspension of the universal requirement that “what is standing must be more than what is breached” is authorized only temporarily for the needs of actual pilgrims.
²¹ But along the pilgrim’s route from Babylonia to Jerusalem the installations are permanent.
²² Since the Mishnah is formulated in the present it must be valid in the present, after the destruction of the Temple and the end of pilgrimages.
²³ Mishnah 10:12.
²⁴ While the cisterns mentioned in the Mishnah were on the Temple Mount, the well was somewhere on the pilgrims’ route. Using a mechanical contraption is rabinically forbidden on the holiday since one might be tempted to fix it in case it broke on the holiday.
²⁵ Babli 104b. Tosephta 8:22.
²⁶ The Babylonian point of view is rejected.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:4)

הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. רִבִּי מֵאִיר יוֹדֶה לְרִבִּי יוּדָה. רִבִּי יוּדָה לֹא יוֹדֶה לְרִבִּי מֵאִיר. רִבִּי מֵאִיר יוֹדֶה לְרִבִּי יוּדָה. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אִית לֵיהּ דִּיּוֹמְדִין פְשׁוּטִין וְאַתְּ אָמַר הָכֵין. מִתּוֹךְְְ שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשֶׂה דִּיּוֹמְדִין אֲבָל לֹא פְשׁוּטִין אַף הוּא סָבוּר לוֹמַר. שֶׁמָּא מְחִיצַת שַׁבָּת כָּךְ הוּא. וְהוּא הוֹלֵךְ וְעוֹשֶׂה כֵן בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר וּמִתְחַיֵיב. רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חִינְנָא. לָא דֵין מוֹדֵי לְדֵין וְלָא דֵין מוֹדֵי לְדֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. אַף עַל גַּב דְּלַא אֲמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה דְכִי הָדָא מִילְּתָא. אֲמָרָהּ דְּכְוָותָהּ. רִבִּי בּוּן וְרִבִּי בּוּן בְּעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. כַּמָּה יְהֵא דִּיּוֹמַד אָרוֹךְ וְלֹא יְהֵא צָרִיךְ פָּשׁוּט. אָמַר לֵיהּ. פָּחוּת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה כְסָתוּם. יוֹתֵר מֵחֲמִשָּׁה הוּפְלַג. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה וְעַד אַרְבָּעָה. אִין תֵּימַר. רִבִּי מֵאִיר יוֹדֶה לְרִבִּי יוּדָה. וְיַעֲשֶׂה בְדִיּוֹמַד אָרוֹךְ וְלֹא יְהֵא צָרִיךְ פָּשׁוּט. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל. לֹא נִצְרַךְ רִבִּי מֵאִיר לַפְּשׁוטִים אֶלָּא בְשִׁיטַּת רִבִּי יוּדָה. אֲמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. וַאֲפִילוּ מִשִּׁיטָּתֵיהּ. מִכָּל מָקוֹם אֵין הָעוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהָעוּמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ צָרִיךְ פָּשׁוּט.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
They wanted to say that Rebbi Meïr would admit to Rebbi Jehudah, Rebbi Jehudah will not admit to Rebbi Meïr²⁷. Rebbi Meïr will admit to Rebbi Jehudah? Does not Rebbi Meïr have simple poles, and you are saying so? If you are making double columns but no straight poles, he²⁸ would think, perhaps a partition for the Sabbath is made in this way; he would make it in other places and become liable. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: Neither of them yields to the other. Rebbi Mana said, even though Rebbi Yose (about)²⁹ did not say this, he said something similar. Rebbi Bun and Rebbi Bun³⁰ asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: How far away does a double column have to be so it would not need a straight [plank]³¹? He told him, less than three [hand-breadths] is considered closed, more than six is far away³². Therefore we have to consider from three to four. If you would say that Rebbi Meïr yields to Rebbi Jehudah, should he not make a double column far away and not need a simple [plank]³³? Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, Rebbi Meïr requires simple [planks] only according to Rebbi Jehudah’s method³⁴. Rebbi Yose said, even according to his own method, since in any case what is standing is not more than what is breached. Since what is standing should be more than what is breached it needs a simple [plank]³⁵.

footnotes:
²⁷ Since R. Jehudah permits a wider opening, he cannot agree to R. Meïr’s lower limit. But R. Meïr could agree that R. Jehudah is correct in principle; only for practical reasons he prescribes a narrower opening.
²⁸ An uninformed person who sees the surroundings of a well turned into a private domain by 4 double poles would think that any domain might be turned into one where carrying is permitted by the same device. But since he sees that at regular intervals simple planks are required he will inquire about the rules and be told that in all other cases the length of the walls has to exceed the lengths of the openings.
²⁹ For דכי read רבי “my teacher Rebbi Yose said”.
³⁰ Read “R. Abun and R. Abin”, cf. Chapter 1, Note 279.
³¹ When would R. Meïr dispense with straight planks? Babli 19b.
³² As long as one can disregard a distance of 3-ε on each side, nothing additional is required.
³³ This quote of R. Zeˋira’s explanation is R. Mana’s proof that R. Zeˋira also holds that R. Meïr cannot agree with R. Jehudah in principle since he would have to indicate how it would be possible to make the enclosure without straight planks.
³⁴ He wants to split the Mishnah into two parts and indicate that straight planks are needed only for a large width following R. Jehudah.
³⁵ Since the Mishnah about enclosing a well in any case contradicts our principle that “what is standing must be more than what is breached”, R. Meïr’s insistence on straight planks is one of principle, not of practical consideration as suggested at the start of this discussion.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:5)

הָיְתָה אֶבֶן אַחַת גְּדוֹלָה. רוֹאִין שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָלֵק וְיֵשׁ בָהּ שִׁשָּׁה לְכָאן וְשִׁשָּׁה לְכָאן נִידּוֹן מִשּׁוּם דִּיוֹמַד. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָקֵק. הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מָאן דָּמַר. שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָקֵק. מוֹדֵד מִבִּפְנִים. מָאן דָּמַר. שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָלֵק. מוֹדֵד מִבַּחוּץ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. וְלֹא עוֹד כִּקְלִיפַּת הַשּׁוּם הַחִיצוֹנָה אַתָּ עָתִיד לְהַעֲמִידָהּ. הֲוֵוי. לָא שַׁנְיָיא בֵּין כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר. שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָלֵק. בֵּין כְּמָאן דָּמַר. שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָקֵק. מוֹדֵד מִבִּפְנִים. מָאן דָּמַר. שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָקֵק. בָּעֲגוֹלָה. וּמָאן דָּמַר. שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָלֵק. בִּמְרוּבַּעַת. תֵּדַע לָךְ שֶׁהוּא כֵן. דְּכֵן תַּנָּיָיה מְתִיב לְחַבְרֵיהּ. אֵין בֵּין דְּבָרַיי לִדְבָרֶיךָ אֶלָּא שֶׁאָתָּה אוֹמֵר בָּעֲגוֹלָה וַאֲנִי אוֹמֵר בִּמְרוּבַּעַת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“If one big stone was there one sees that if it is split and there be six [hand-breadths] in both directions it is considered a double column.³⁶” Some Tannaim state, if it is hollowed out. They wanted to say that he who says, if it is hollowed out, measures from the inside while he who says, if it is split, measures from the outside. Rebbi Yose said, would you not let it stand if it was like garlic skin³⁷? This implies that both he who says that it is split as also he who says it is hollowed out measures from the inside. He who says, if it is hollowed out, if it is round³⁸; he who says, if it is split, if it is square. You should know that it is so since one Tanna said to the other, the only difference between my formulation and yours is that you are speaking of a round one but I about a square one.

footnotes:
³⁶ Tosephta 1:12, Babli 19b. If the stone has a square base and each side is six hand-breadths long it is counted as double column.
³⁷ Since the Mishnah does not prescribe depth of columns or planks there is no practical difference whether one measures from the outside or from the inside of an arbitrarily thin membrane.
³⁸ If the base of the stone is circular the radius, not the diameter, must be 6 hand-breadth (1 cubit). In Babli and Tosephta this is an explicit statement by R. Ismael ben R. Joḥanan ben Beroqa.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:6)

הָיָה שָׁם חָרִיץ עָמוֹק עֲשָׂרָה וְרָחַב אַרְבָּעָה וְיֵשׁ בּוֹ שִׂשָּׁה לָכָאן וְשִׁשָּׁה לָכָאן. נִידּוֹן מִשּׁוּם דִּיוֹמַד. לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר חָרִיץ אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ גַּבְשׁוּשִׁית. מִקְצָתוֹ חָרִיץ וּמִקְצָתוֹ גַבְשׁוּשִׁית. הָיוּ חֲמִשָּׁה קָנִים וְאֵין בֵּין זֶה לָזֶה שְׁלֹשָׁה. וְיֵשׁ בָּהֶן שִׂשָּׁה לָכָאן וְשִׁשָּׁה לָכָאן. נִידּוֹנִין מִשּׁוּם דִּיוֹמַד. שְׁלֹשָׁה וְקָשַׁר גָּמִי מִלְּמַעֲלָן מָהוּ שֶׁיַּצִּיל מִשּׁוּם פֵּיאָה. כְּלוּם פֵּיאָה מַצֶּלֶת עַד שֶׁתְּהֵא מוֹכַחַת מִכָּל צְדָדֶיהָ. אֶלָּא כָּהֵין דַּעֲגָלִין כְּסָתוּם הוּא. הֵיךְ מַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר תַּמָּן. רוֹאִין שֶׁאִם תֵּיחָלֵק וְיֵשׁ בָהּ שִׁשָּׁה לְכָאן וְשִׁשָּׁה לְכָאן נִידּוֹנְתְּ מִשּׁוּם דִּיוֹמַד. וָמַר אוֹף הָכָא כֵן. תַּמָּן עַד קְלִיפַּת הַשּׁוּם הַחִיצוֹנָה אַתָּ עָתִיד לְהַעֲמִידָהּ. וְהָכָא מָה אִית לָךְ. אִם אוֹמֵר אַתְּ כֵּן בִּטַּלְתָּה הִילְכוֹת פֵּיאָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
If there was a ditch ten [hand-breadths] deep and four wide, and it extends six in each direction³⁹, it is judged to be a double column. Not only a ditch but also a heap⁴⁰. Partially a ditch and partially a heap? If there were five sticks with less than three [hand-breadths] between them which together cover six [hand-breadths] in each direction, they are judged to be a double column⁴¹. If there were three⁴² and he tied bast on top, would this save as symbolic fence? Does not a symbolic fence save only if it is proven from each side⁴³? Then what was tied around is as if blocked. Similar to what you are saying there, one sees that if it is split and there would be six [hand-breadths] in both directions it is considered a double column, could you say the same here? There would you not let it stand if it was like garlic skin; here what can you say? If you would say so you would abrogate the rules of symbolic fences⁴⁴.

footnotes:
³⁹ At a corner two ditches, 1 cubit long, 2/3 cubits wide and 12/3 cubits deep are the replacement of a double column erected there.
⁴⁰ A rudimentary wall also counts if it has the necessary dimensions.
⁴¹ Since any opening of less than 3 hand-breadths is disregarded, the five sticks (two at each side and one at the right angle) stand for solid walls of 1 cubit length in each direction.
⁴² Three sticks at ABC form an isosceles right angled triangle with vertex B and edge length 6 hand-breadths.
⁴³ Chapter 1 Note 274.
⁴⁴ There are no exceptions to the rule indicated in the preceding Note.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:7)

הַכּוֹתֶל וְהָאִילָן וְאִישׁוּת קָנִים נִידּוֹנִין מִשּׁוּם דִּיוֹמַד. עָלוֹ מֵאֵילֵיהֶן מְטַלְטְלִין בָּהֶן עַד בֵּית סְאָתַיִם. עֲשָׂאָן בְּיָד מְטַלְטְלִין בָּהֶן אֲפִילוּ כוֹר אֲפִילוּ כוֹרַיִים. הָיְתָה בְּאֵר אַחַת גָּדוֹל. לְחֶצְיָיהּ עָשָׂה וּלְחֶצְיָיהּ לֹא עָשָׂה. לְחֶצְיָיהּ שֶׁעָשָׂה מוּתָּר. וּלְחֶצְיָיהּ שֶׁלֹּא עָשָׂה אָסוּר. הָיוּ שְׁתַּיִם. הָאֶמְצָעִי מָהוּ שֶׁיִּדּוֹן לְכָאן וּלְכָאן. מַה צְרִיכָה לֵיהּ. כְּשֶׁהָיוּ שְׁנַיִם מְמַלִּין. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה אֶחָד מְמַלֵּא נִידּוֹן לְכָאן וּלְכָאן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
A wall, and a tree, and a copse of reeds are counted as double columns⁴⁵ 24b.. If they grew by themselves one may carry there up to an area of two *bet se’ah*. If he planted them with his hands one may carry there even one or two *bet kor*⁴⁶. If there was one large well and he made [the double columns] for one half but not for the other half. For the half for which he made it it is permitted, for the half for which he did not make it it is forbidden. If there were two, could the space in-between be considered for both sides? What is his problem? If both were used to fill; but if only one was used to fill it is usable for both sides⁴⁷.

footnotes:
⁴⁵ Babli 15a, 19b, Šabbat
⁴⁶ Chapter 1, Note 288.
⁴⁷ If separate symbolic enclosures were made for two adjacent wells and one set of double columns serves for both enclosures, it is clear that one may not simultaneously draw water from both wells since this would use the middle double pillars in two contradictory ways. (This implies that they were double, not triple, i. e., shaped like a Γ but not a Τ.) But if at one time only one well is used, the next time the other well may be used, even on the same Sabbath.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:8
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:8)

חָצֵר שֶׁהִיא פְתוּחָה לְפַסִּים מְטַלְטְלִין מִן הֶחָצֵר לַפַּסִּים אֲבָל לֹא מִן הַפַּסִּים לֶחָצֵר. הָא שְׁתַּיִם אָסוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא. לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵירוֹת. אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ חָצֵר אַחַת וּבָהּ שְׁנֵי בָתִּים. סָבְרִין מֵימַר. בְּשֶׁלֹּא עִירֵיבוּ. הָא אִם עִירֵיבוּ מוּתָּרִין. רִבִּי דָּנִיֵּאל בְּרֵיהּ דָּרַב קְטִינָה בְשֵׁם רַב חוּנָה. אֲפִילוּ עִירֵיבוּ אֲסוּרוֹת. שֶׁאֵין עֵירוּב עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָן אַחַת. רַב חוּנָה כְדַעְתֵּיהּ. דְּאִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן. מָבוֹי שֶׁצִּידּוֹ אֶחָד גּוֹי וְצִידּוֹ אֶחָד יִשְׂרָאֵל. רַב חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַב אָמַר. אִם עִירִיבוּ דֶּרֶךְ פְּתָחִים הַגּוֹי אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶן. אַבְָּא בַּר בַּר חָנָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אֲפִילוּ עִירֵיבוּ דֶּרֶךְ חֲלוֹנוֹת אֵין הַגּוֹי אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶן. וַאֲפִילו דְּיִסְבּוֹר רַב חוּנָה כְרִבִּי יוּחָנָן. תַּמָּן מוּתָּר. מוֹדֶה הוּא הָכָא שֶׁהוּא אֲסוּר. תַּמָּן שֶׁמָּא לְמָחָר תֶּחֱרָב הַבְּאֵר. אַף הוּא סָבוּר לוֹמַר. שֶׁמָּא עֵירוּב מוֹעִיל בְּפַסֵּי בֵּירָאוֹת. וְאִין מוֹעִיל עִירוּב בְּפַסֵּי בֵירָיוֹת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
From a courtyard open to planks one carries from the courtyard to the planks but not from the planks to the courtyard⁴⁸. Therefore two are forbidden⁴⁹. Rebbi Abba said, not only two courtyards but even a single courtyard and in it two houses⁵⁰. They thought to say if they did not make an *eruv*; therefore if they made an *eruv* it would be permitted. Rebbi Daniel the son of Rav Qatina in the name of Rav Ḥuna: even if they made an *eruv* it is forbidden, for the *eruv* does not make them one⁵¹. Rav Ḥuna follows his opinion, as they disagreed: An alley in which on one side dwelt a Gentile and on the other a Jew, Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: even if they made an *eruv* through doors the Gentile prohibits it for them⁵² was totally conforming to the rules.. Abba bar bar Ḥana in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even if they made the *eruv* through windows the Gentile does not prohibit for them⁵³ share only windows, not full door openings.. Even if Rav Ḥuna would hold with Rebbi Joḥanan that there it is permitted, here he has to agree that it is forbidden. There, maybe tomorrow the well will run dry and then he would think that perhaps an *eruv* is efficient for the planks of wells when an *eruv* is not efficient for the planks of wells⁵⁴ have any impact on the rules of wells surrounded by double columns. If the well runs dry before the Sabbath the double columns lose all their meaning..

footnotes:
⁴⁸ Tosephta 1:15 and Babli 20a disagree with this Yerushalmi in principle. The courtyard is walled in according to the rules that what is standing must be more than what is open; there one carries according to the general rules. It is open to a place where carrying is permitted only for the needs of animals; this place is an appendix of the courtyard but the courtyard is not an appendix to the place.
⁴⁹ If two different courtyards open on the well, the well cannot belong to two different domains; therefore it belongs to neither of them.
⁵⁰ And each of the houses has a backdoor opening on the well.
⁵¹ The permission to use the well is given only if there is a single opening from the courtyard to the well.
⁵² Since the Gentile is not subject to the laws of the Sabbath he cannot agree to a change of status of the alley for the Sabbath even if otherwise the eruv
⁵³ In his opinion the Gentile is irrelevant for the rules of the Sabbath even if the houses which are united by the eruv
⁵⁴ The prohibition of a well which is accessible from two different courtyards is based on a practical problem rather than a legal principle; one has to avoid giving the impression that courtyards joined in an eruv


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:9
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:9)

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. לֹא הִתִּירוּ פַסֵּי בִּירִיּוֹת אֶלָּא לְמַלְאוֹת בָּהֵן מַיִם בִּלְבַד. בָּאוּ מַיִם בַּשַּׁבָּת. כְּבָר נִכְנְסָה שַׁבָּת בְּאִיסּוּר. חָרְבָה הַבְּאֵר כְּבָר נִכְנְסָה שַׁבָּת בְּהֵיתֵר. רִבִּי יוֹנָה אָמַר. רִבִּי נָסָא שָׁאַל. מָהוּ לְטַלְטֵל בֵּין הַפַּסִּים. נֵימַר. אִם יֵשׁ בֵּין זֶה לָזֶה אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים כְּאַסְקוּפָּה אֲסוּרָה. וְאִם לָאו כְּאַיסְקוּפָּה מוּתֶּרֶת. מוּתָּר לְכָאן וּמוּתָּר לְכָאן. וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יַחֲלִיף.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, they permitted the planks of wells only to draw water⁵⁵. If water came on the Sabbath, the Sabbath already came with prohibition. If the well dried out, the Sabbath already came with permission⁵⁶. Rebbi Jonah said that Rebbi Nasa asked, may one carry between the planks⁵⁷? We should say that if there are four hand-breadths between one and the other it is like a prohibited threshold, otherwise like a permitted threshold, permitted for both domains; only one should not exchange⁵⁸.

footnotes:
⁵⁵ Babli 21a.
⁵⁶ Babli 20a disagrees in both cases.
⁵⁷ He questions R, Yose ben R. Abun’s statement.
⁵⁸ Chapter 1, Note 162.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:10
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:1:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:1:10)

תַּנֵּי. יֵשְׁנָן כְּעֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. כִּשְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה וּכְאַרְבַּע עֶשְׂרֵה פָּרָא. אַמָּה מֶחֱצָה וְאַמָּה בֵּינַיִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It was stated, there are about ten cubits, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says, like thirteen or fourteen minus¹⁵⁹ “too little, not enough”. In *Demay* 5:2 the expression is פָּרָא צִיבְחַר “less a little bit.”: a cubit, a half, and one cubit interspace⁶⁰.

footnotes:
¹ As explained at the end of the discussion of this Mishnah, the space between two planks can be 10 cubits for R. Meïr and almost 14 for R. Jehudah.
⁵⁹ Both R. Meïr and R. Jehudah presume that an average cow is 1.5 cubits wide and between the two teams one leaves 1 cubit of space. R. Meïr permits space for 6 cows, 9 cubits, + 1 cubit. R. Jehudah for 8 cows, 12 cubits, + 1 cubit, for a width of 13 cubits. He admits a wider room for moving of the cows and accepts any distance less than 14 cubits.פרא is Latin parum
⁶⁰ Discussion of Mishnah 2.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:2:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:2:1)

**משנה:** מוּתָּר לְהַקְרִיב לַבְּאֵר וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא פָרָה רֹאשָׁהּ וְרוּבָּהּ בִּפְנִים וְשׁוֹתָה. מוּתָּר לְהַרְחִיק כָּל שֶׁהוּא וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיַרְבֶּה בַפַּסִּים:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** It is permitted to make them close to the well on condition that the head and most of the cow be inside when she drinks. It is permitted to put them arbitrarily far away on condition to add planks³.

footnotes:
³ The distances between two planks cannot be greater than those described in Mishnah 1, 5 cubits for R. Meïr and 14 for R. Jehudah.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:2:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:2:2)

**הלכה:** מוּתָּר לְהַקְרִיב לַבְּאֵר כול׳. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יֶצְחָק. וְהוּא שִׁיעוּרָא. כְּשִׁיעוּר הַזֶּה אֲפִילוּ גָמָל כּוּלּוֹ מִבַּחוּץ מוּתָּר. פָּחוּת מִכְּשִׁיעוּר הַזֶּה אֲפִילוּ גְדִי כּוּלּוֹ מִבִּפְנִים אָסוּר. תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר. מְלֹא גָמָל וְגַמָּלוֹ. מַה וּפְלִיג. כָּל מַה שֶׁהַפָּרָה פוֹשֶׁטֶת צַוָּארָהּ הַגָּמָל עוֹקֵם צַוָּארוֹ. מָה אַתְּ בָּעֵי. וְאֵין הַפָּרָה עוֹמֶדֶת בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים וְאוֹכֶלֶת בִּרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. תַּמָּן בָּהוּא דְּמַפְסִיק לֵיהּ. בְּרַם הָכָא בְּאוֹכֶלֶת מֵאֵילֶיהָ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** “It is permitted to make them close to the well,”⁶⁰ etc. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac: This is its measure⁶¹. With this measure even though the camel is entirely outside it is permitted. Less than this measure even if the kid goat is entirely inside it is forbidden. It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, enough for a camel and its camel driver⁶². Does he disagree? In every case where the cow stretches its neck, the camel bends its neck. Why do you want this⁶³? Could not the cow stand in the public domain and eat in a private domain? Rebbi Yose said, there it is about one who [provides]⁶⁴ for it, but here if it eats by itself⁶⁵.

footnotes:
⁶⁰ Discussion of Mishnah 2.
⁶¹ The Mishnah prescribes that the poles must be far enough away that a cow’s head and most of its body be inside. This is part of the rabbinic institutions, it is permitted even for camels which are much longer and must be observed even for a herd of goats which are much shorter.
⁶² A minimal domain around a well may be used for camels only if it is wide enough to allow the camel driver to be completely inside with his camel.
⁶³ The explanation is not satisfactory since neither cow nor camel are required to observe the distinction between public and private domain; this is only for humans. Why is space for the camel driver needed?
⁶⁴ Reading דמספיק for דמפסיק “who interrupts”.
⁶⁵ The camel needs its camel driver while the cow does not need its master. Therefore humans are not mentioned by RR. Meïr and Jehudah who define everything referring to cattle. Babli 20b.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:2:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:2:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:2:3)

עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר דְּיוֹמְדִין פְּשׁוּטִין. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה דִּיוֹמְדִין אֲבָל לֹא פְשׁוּטִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
In Rebbi Meïr’s opinion, double columns and single ones; in Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion double columns but no single ones⁶⁶.

footnotes:
⁶⁶ If the area around the well is extended, then the additional planks required by the Mishnah are simple planks of arbitrary size for R. Meïr but double planks (2 times 6 hand-breadths straight) for R. Jehudah.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:3:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:3:1)

**משנה:** רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר עַד בֵּית סָאתַיִם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ לֹא אָמְרוּ בֵית סָאתַיִם אֶלָּא בַגִּינָּה וּבַקַּרְפֵּף. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה דִיר אוֹ סַהַר אוֹ מוּקְצֶה אוֹ חָצֵר אֲפִילוּ בֵית חֲמֵשֶׁת כּוֹרִין אֲפִילוּ בֵית עֲשֶׂרֶת כּוֹרִין מוּתָּר וּמוּתָּר לְהַרְחִיק כָּל שֶׁהוּא וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיַרְבֶּה בַפַּסִּין:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Rebbi Jehudah says, up to two *bet se’ah*⁴. They said to him, two *bet se’ah* were said only for a garden patch⁵ and a corral⁶. But if there was a sheep-pen, or a sheep corral, or a backyard, or a front yard, even five *bet kor*⁷ is 30 *seˋah*; a *bet kor* 75’000 square cubits., even ten *bet kor* are permitted and it is permitted to put them arbitrarily far away on condition to add planks³.

footnotes:
⁴ In his opinion the maximal size of domain for which double planks are authorized are the standard 5’000 square cubits.
⁵ An irrigated vegetable garden.
⁶ For cattle.
⁷ A kor
³ The distances between two planks cannot be greater than those described in Mishnah 1, 5 cubits for R. Meïr and 14 for R. Jehudah.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:3:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:3:2)

**הלכה:** עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה בְּאֵר מָהוּ שֶׁתַּעֲלֶה מִמִּידַּת סְאָתַיִם. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר. בְּאֵר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ מִידַּת סְאָתַיִם אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַרְחִיק מִמֶּנָּה אֶלָּא מְלֹא רֹאשָׁהּ וְרוּבָּהּ שֶׁלְפָּרָה. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁהַבְּאֵר עוֹלָה מִמִּידַּת סְאָתַיִם.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** According to Rebbi Jehudah, is the well included in the measure of two [*bet*] *se’ah*⁶⁷? Let us hear from the following⁶⁸: If a well is two *bet se’ah* one may not go farther away than for the head and most of the body of a cow. This implies that the well is included in the measure of two [*bet*] *se’ah*.

footnotes:
⁶⁷ Who in Mishnah 3 restricts the area around the well to this size.
⁶⁸ Tosephta 1:13, Babli 22a.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:4:1)

**משנה:** אִם הָיְתָה דֶרֶךְ הָרַבִּים מַפְסְקָתָהּ יְסַלָּקֶנָּה לַצְּדָדִין. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִין אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ. אֶחָד בְּאֵר הָרַבִּים וּבוֹר הָרַבִּים וּבְאֵר הַיָחִיד עוֹשִׂין לָהֶן פַּסִּים. אֲבָל לְבוֹר הַיָחִיד עוֹשִׂין לוֹ מְחִצָּה גְבוֹהָה עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא אוֹמֵר אֵין עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּים אֶלָּא לִבְאֵר הָרַבִּים בִּלְבָד. וְלַשְּׁאָר עוֹשִׂין חֲגוֹרָה גְבוֹהָה עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** If a public road interrupts them he should divert it around it, but the Sages say that this is unnecessary⁸. One makes planks both for a public cistern, a public well, and a private well, but for a private cistern one makes a partition of ten hand-breadths⁹, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Jehudah ben Bava said, one makes planks only for a public well; for everything else one makes a belt¹⁰ ten hand-breadths high.

footnotes:
⁸ The first clause in this sentence is R. Jehudah’s (and is stated as such in the independent Mishnah mss., the Mishnah in the Babli, and the quote in the Halakhah). He holds that enclosures which trespass on a public road are unauthorized.
⁹ Since the double planks are authorized only for the benefit of animals, once a cistern runs dry the double planks lose their utility and it would be forbidden to carry there. Therefore for a non-public cistern he requires a regular enclosure where one may carry regardless of the amount of water available.
¹⁰ Possibly by the standards of Mishnah 1:9.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:4:2)

**הלכה:** פיס׳. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר עַד בֵּית סָאתַיִם כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. וְכֵן גְּשָׁרִים הַמְפוּלָּשִׁין מְטַלְטְלִין תַּחְתֵּיהֶן בַּשַּׁבָּת. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין. אָמַר רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. אֵינָהּ מוּחְלֶפֶת. אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. דִּי סְבַר כְּרַב יְהוּדָה. דָּמַר רַב יְהוּדָה. הָדָא דְתֵימַר בִּמְפוּלָּשִׁין לְבִקְעָה. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ מְפוּלָּשִׁין לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים אָסוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. בְּכָל אָתָר רִבִּי לָעְזָר סְמִיךְ לְרִבִּי חִיָיה רוֹבָה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. כֵּיצַד מַתִּירִין רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. לֶחִי מִיכָּן וְלֶחִי מִיכָּן. קוֹרָה מִיכָּן וְקוֹרָה מִיכָּן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים. לֶחִי וְקוֹרָה מִיכָּן. וְיַעֲשֶׂה צוּרַת הַפֶּתַח מִיכָּן. וָכָא אָמַר הָכֵין. כָּאן בְּעֶשֶׂר. וְכָאן בִּשְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה. מִילֵּיהוֹן דְּרַבָּנִן פְּלִיגִין. רִבִּי אָחָא אָמַר. רַב הוֹשַׁעְיָה שָׁאַל לְאַבָּא. כַּמָּה תְהֵא פִירְצַת הַמָּבוֹי עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה. וְהוּא אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִשְּׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה. וְהָכָא אָמַר הָכֵין. דְּרַבָּנִן דְּקַיְסָרִין אָמְרִין. תַּמָּן עוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ. בְּרַם הָכָא. פָּרוּץ רָבָה עַל הָעוֹמֵד.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Paragraph. “Rebbi Jehudah says, up to two *bet se’ah*,”⁶⁹ etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the argument of Rebbi Jehudah is inverted, as we have stated there: “And similarly one carries under panelled bridges on the Sabbath, the words of Rebbi Jehudah, but the Sages forbid it⁷⁰”. Rebbi Eleazar said, it is not inverted. Rebbi Jeremiah said, for he is of Rav Jehudah’s opinion, as Rav Jehudah said, that is if it is open to a domain of difficult access. But if it was open to the public domain it is forbidden⁷¹, that Mishnah is consistent with Mishnah 2:4.. Rebbi Yose said, everywhere Rebbi Eleazar seeks support from the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya⁷², end of Halakhah 2:3.. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, how does one permit public domain? Rebbi Jehudah says, a lath on each side or a beam at each side but the Sages say a lath and a beam on one side and he shall make a door frame on the other side. And here he says so⁷³? Here about ten [cubits], there about thirteen⁷⁴. The words of the rabbis disagree. Rebbi Aḥa said, Rav Hoshaia asked my father, how large can the breach of an alley be in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah? And he told him, thirteen [cubits]. And here he says so⁷⁵? The Rabbis of Caesarea say, there what is standing is more than what is breached but here what is breached is more than what is standing⁷⁶.

footnotes:
⁶⁹ Even though the quote is from Mishnah 3, the discussion is about Mishnah 4 where R. Jehudah prohibits using part of a thoroughfare as enclosure of a well.
⁷⁰ Mishnah 9:5, explained in Chapter 1, Note 40.
⁷¹ A quote from the end of Chapter 9. Since R. Jehudah in Mishnah 9:5 accepts virtual walls only for karmelit
⁷² Cf. Yebamot
⁷³ There he permits turning parts of a public road, i. e., an alley open at both ends, into a private domain but here he forbids. Babli 22a.
⁷⁴ A roadway cannot have the status of an alley if it is wider than 10 cubits (Mishnah 1:1) but the enclosure of a well can be 13.
⁷⁵ Since it was stated just before that only a breach up to 10 cubits is acceptable.
⁷⁶ The two situations cannot be compared. 13 cubits are permitted only in the situation of the enclosure of a well which is made for the benefit of animals, not humans.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:4:3)

פיס׳. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר. אִם הָיְתָה דֶרֶךְ הָרַבִּים מַפְסְקָתָהּ כול׳. מַה בֵין בּוֹר הָרַבִּים וּמַה בֵין בּוֹר הַיָּחִיד. בּוֹר הָרַבִּים יֵשׁ לוֹ קוֹל. בּוֹר הַיָּחִיד אֵין לוֹ קוֹל. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ לִבְאֵרוֹ. אֶלָּא בּוֹר הָרַבִּים מֵימָיו מְצוּיִין לְכַלּוֹת. בּוֹר הַיָּחִיד אֵין מֵימָיו מְצוּיִין לְכַלּוֹת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Paragraph. “Rebbi Jehudah says⁸, if a public road interrupts them,” etc. What is the difference between a public cistern and a private cistern⁹? A public cistern has publicity⁷⁷, a private cistern has no publicity. Then even for his well⁷⁸! But a public well can be expected to run dry, a private well is not expected to run dry⁷⁹.

footnotes:
⁸ The first clause in this sentence is R. Jehudah’s (and is stated as such in the independent Mishnah mss., the Mishnah in the Babli, and the quote in the Halakhah). He holds that enclosures which trespass on a public road are unauthorized.
⁹ Since the double planks are authorized only for the benefit of animals, once a cistern runs dry the double planks lose their utility and it would be forbidden to carry there. Therefore for a non-public cistern he requires a regular enclosure where one may carry regardless of the amount of water available.
⁷⁷ It is common knowledge when a public cistern runs dry and the enclosure may not be used, whereas for a private cistern he might start using the enclosure and discover only belatedly that he was carrying there in violation of the Sabbath laws.
⁷⁸ Why are enclosures permitted for private wells whose status is not monitored?
⁷⁹ Only public wells are subject to permanent overuse.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:4:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:4:4)

רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא עַמְרָם רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה אָבוֹי דְרִבִּי מַתַּנְיָה. מַתְנִיתַא אָמְרָה כֵן. עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין לַבֵּירָיוֹת. וְלֹא לְבוֹרוֹת. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. אֲבָל לְבוֹר הַיָחִיד עוֹשִׂין לוֹ מְחִיצָּה גְבוֹהָה עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין לְבוֹר הָרַבִּים. וְדִכְוָותָהּ עוֹשִׂין פַּסִּין לַבֵּירָיוֹת. לַבְּאֵר הָרַבִּים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Amram, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah ben Bava⁸⁰. Rebbi Jehudah the father of Rebbi Mattaniah said, the Mishnah says so, “one makes planks for wells,” not for cisterns. But did we not state, “but for a private cistern one makes a partition of ten hand-breadths⁹, the words of Rebbi Aqiba”? But therefore we must deal with public cisterns, and similarly “one makes planks for wells,” for public wells.

footnotes:
⁸⁰ Babli 23a.Since R. Aqiba permits flimsy enclosures only for public cisterns and he otherwise treats cisterns and wells according to the same rules, he must refer to public wells in Mishnah 1.
⁹ Since the double planks are authorized only for the benefit of animals, once a cistern runs dry the double planks lose their utility and it would be forbidden to carry there. Therefore for a non-public cistern he requires a regular enclosure where one may carry regardless of the amount of water available.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:5:1)

**משנה:** וְעוֹד אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא הַגִּינָּה וְהַקַּרְפֵּף שֶׁהֵן שִׁבְעִים אַמָּה וְשִׁירַיִם עַל שִׁבְעִים אַמָּה וְשִׁירַיִם מוּקֶּפֶת גָדֵר גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים מְטַלְטְלִין בְּתוֹכָהּ וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בָהּ שׁוֹמִירָה אוֹ בֵית דִּירָה אוֹ שֶׁתְּהֵא סְמוּכָה לָעִיר.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** In addition, Rebbi Jehudah ben Bava said, if a garden patch or a corral are seventy cubits and a remainder by seventy cubits and a remainder surrounded by a wall ten hand-breadths high¹¹. In an enclosed area of up to 2 *bet se’ah* one may carry. One of more than 2 *bet se’ah* may be turned into a domain for carrying only if it is used for human dwelling. one carries inside on condition that it contain a watchman’s hut or a dwelling or be close to a village¹²

footnotes:
¹¹ Since 70.71…2 = 5’000, the area enclosed is 2 bet se’ah
¹² Within 70.71 cubits of the village.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:5:2)

**הלכה:** פיס׳. וְעוֹד אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא כול׳. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. מֵחֲצַר הַמִּשְׁכָּן לָמְדוּ. אוֹרֶךְ הֶחָצֵר מֵאָה בָאַמָּה וְרוֹחַב חֲמִשִּׁים בַּחֲמִשִּׁים. וְחַמְשִׁין זִימְנִין מִן מֵאָה הָא חֲמִשָּׁה אַלְפִין. שׁוּבְעִין מִן שׁוּבְעִין הָא חֲמִשָּׁה אַלְפִין פָּרָא מֵאָה. וְתַנִּינָן שִׁבְעִים וְשִׁירַיִים. וְתַנֵּי שְׁמוּאֵל. אַמָּה וּשְׁנֵי שְׁלִישֵׁי אַמָּה שָׁנוּ. שׁוּבְעִין זִימְנִין מִן תְּרֵין תְּלַתוֹתִין וְשִׁבְעִין זִימְנִין מִן תְּרֵין תְּלַתוֹתִין דְּעָבְדִין מֵאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים תְּלַתוֹתִין מֵאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים תְּלַתוֹתִין שֶׁהֵן תִּשְׁעִים וְשָׁלשׁ אַמָּה וּשְׁלִישׁ. צֵא מֵהֶן אַרְבָּעָה תִשּׁוּעִין לְאַרְבַּע רוּחוֹת. נִשְׁתַּיֵיר שָׁם תִּשְׁעָה עָשָׂר תְּלַתוֹתִין חָסֵר תִּשּׁוּעַ. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. יֵשׁ כָּאן דָּבָר קַל וְלֹא יָכְלוּ חֲכָמִים לַעֲמוֹד עָלָיו.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Paragraph. “In addition, Rebbi Jehudah ben Bava said,” etc. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, they inferred it from the courtyard of the Tabernacle: *the length of the courtyard 100 cubits wide 50 by 50*⁸¹. 27:18. Babli 23b. The expression “50 by 50” is read as meaning that the standard measure of area shall be a square of 5’000 square cubits.. 50 times 100 are 5’000. 70 by 70 are 5’000 minus 100, and we have stated “seventy cubits and a remainder.” And Samuel stated, they stated cubits and two thirds of a cubit. Seventy times two thirds and seventy times two thirds make 140 thirds each; 140 thirds and 140 thirds are 93⅓. There is missing from there 4/9 for the corner, there remain nineteen thirds minus one ninth. As we have stated, there is a slight difference which the Sages could not compute⁸².

footnotes:
⁸¹ Ex
⁸² Since 702 = 4900 and 712= 5041 the square root of 5’000 is between 70 and 71. In order to compute 70⅔2 one uses the binomial formula in its geometric form: A square of sides 70⅔ is composed of a square of sides 70 + two rectangles 70 by ⅔ + a square of area 4/9 for a total of 49937/9. The difference to 5000 is 62/9 = 19/3 -1/9. The additional correction was a problem. Not only is the square root of 5000 irrational, not expressible as a fraction, but of the two square root algorithms used in Antiquity, the Babylonian, using a kind of Newton approximation, is an approximation from above and the Hellenistic, using an equivalent of modern continued fractions, starts with an approximation from above, when the legal situation here demands an approximation from below. 70⅔, is a reasonable rational approximation from below to √5000 since 707/92 already is 5009. The second term of the continued fraction development is an approximation from below, 70140/197, not a practical expression. The systematic approximation of square roots from below which used to be taught in our schools is essentially dependent on the notion of place values underlying Indian- Arabic numerals. The first approximation of √5000 both in the Babylonian and the Hellenistic methods, 705/7, is an exceedingly good low-denominator approximation from above, (705/7)2 = 500025/49, and therefore not usable in this context. The approximation of 70⅔ cubits allows a measuring error of 1 digit without exceeding √5000. Tosephta 4:9.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:5:3)

קַרְפֵּף שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ מִידַּת סְאָתַיִם אֵינוֹ מוּתָּר לְטַלְטֵל בּוֹ אֶלָּא בְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם. בָּזֶּה בֵית סְאָה וּבָזֶּה בֵית סְאָה חָסֵר אַרְבַּע אָמּוֹת. רִבִּי זְעִירָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מְטַלְטְלִין בִּשְׁנֵי תַשְׁלוּמִין לָרִאשׁוֹן. רִבִּי לָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אֵין מְטַלְטְלִין בַּשֵּׁנִי תַשְׁלוּמִין לָרִאשׁוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי לָא שֶׁאִם הָיוּ שְׁלשָׁה. בָּזֶּה בֵית סְאָה וּבָזֶּה בֵית סְאָה וּבָזֶּה בֵית סְאָה. מוֹדִין שֶׁמְטַלְטְלִין בַּשֵּׁנִי תַשְׁלוּמִין לָרִאשׁוֹן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
In a corral which covers two *bet se’ah* one is permitted only to carry a distance of four cubits⁸³ one requires a wall or a fence with woof and warp (Mishnah 5).. If there were two, each one a *bet se’ah* minus four cubits; Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: one carries in the second as complement of the first⁸⁴. Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, one may not carry in the second as complement of the first. Rebbi Zeˋira said, Rebbi La agrees that if there were three⁸⁵. Each of the three a *bet se’ah*, one agrees that one carries in the second as complement of the first⁸⁶ at his disposal..

footnotes:
⁸³ This refers to areas enclosed by a makeshift fence such as is authorized for a caravan. The moment it is a full two bet se’ah
⁸⁴ Cf. Babli 93a. Two people enclosed adjacent areas with makeshift fences. R. La notes that they cannot combine their areas to one authorized for caravans, cf. Chapter 1 Note 296.
⁸⁵ Three people camping together form a caravan and follow the rules explained in Chapter 1.
⁸⁶ Since as member of a caravan he has two bet se’ah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:5:4)

קַרְפֵּף שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ עַד בֵית סְאָתַיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. הוֹאִיל וְהוּא רָאוּי לַתִּיר עַל יְדֵי שְׁיָירָה וְזָרַק מֵרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְתוֹכוֹ. חַיָיב. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק בָעֵי. (לֹא לִכְשֶׁתַּתִּירֶנּוּ) [לִכְשֶׁתִּירְצוּ] שְׁיָירָה. לֶאֱסוֹר אָסוּר. הָא חַיָיב חַטָּאת אֵין כָּאן. מֵעַתָּה מָבוֹי שֶׁקּוֹרָתוֹ לְמַעֲלָה מֵעֶשְׂרִים. הוֹאִיל וְהוּא כָשֵׁר עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה מִשְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה וְזָרַק מֵרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְתוֹכוֹ. וְחַיָיב. מָבוֹי שֶׁנִּפְרָץ יוֹתֵר מֵעֶשֶׂר. הוֹאִיל וּפִירְצַת הַמָּבוֹי עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה מִשְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה וְזָרַק מֵרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְתוֹכוֹ. חַיָיב.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
A corral which covers up to two *bet se’ah*. Rebbi Abbahu said, since it can be permitted by a caravan, if somebody threw from the public domain into it he is liable⁸⁷. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac asked, (not after it was permitted) [if it was chosen by]⁸⁸ the caravan it becomes forbidden in a prohibition; therefore here is no liability for a purification sacrifice⁸⁹. By the same argument, an alley whose beam is higher than twenty cubits since it is qualified in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah (more than thirteen)⁹⁰, if somebody threw from the public domain into it would he be liable? An alley which was breached more than ten [cubits], since a breach of an alley in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah is more than thirteen, if somebody threw from the public domain into it would he be liable?

footnotes:
⁸⁷ Even though the enclosure made by a caravan does not qualify as wall of a private domain under normal circumstances, the area becomes a private domain for the rules of the Sabbath.
⁸⁸ The text in parentheses was originally written by the scribe, the text in brackets is the corrector’s. The original text is preferable.
⁸⁹ R. Abbahu’s statement is refuted. Since the entire arrangement is rabbinical, no biblical liability is possible.
⁹⁰ The text in parentheses should be deleted; it is appropriate only in the next sentence.Since practice does not follow R. Jehudah, the rules of private domain cannot be applied to areas which may become private domains only according to him.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:5:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:5:5)

חָצֵר שֶׁהִיא פְתוּחָה לְקַרָפֵּף. מְטַלְטְלִין מִן הֶחָצֵר לְקַרָפֵּף. אֲבָל לֹא מִן הַקַּרְפֵּף לֶחָצֵר. רִבִּי יוּדָן עַנְתוֹדְרַיָּא שָׁאַל. מָהוּ לְטַלְטֵל מִקַּרְפֵּף לְקַרְפֵּף דָּרָךְ חָצֵר.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
If a courtyard is open into a corral one may carry from the courtyard to the corral but not from the corral to the courtyard⁹¹. Rebbi Judah from Anthodriya asked, may one carry from one corral to another corral through the courtyard⁹²? ⁹³ The opinion of Rebbi Jehudah seems inverted, as we have stated there, “what is a corral? Anything close to a village, the words of Rebbi Jehudah.” And here he says so? Rebbi Mana said, Rebbi Jehudah treated it as a house.

footnotes:
⁹¹ Courtyard and corral must have a common owner. Since the corral (enclosed by a makeshift fence) is an appendix to the courtyard but not vice-versa, cf. Note 48, Mishnah 9:2.
⁹² Since from courtyard to corral is permitted, may one move from one corral to the other without stopping in the courtyard? The question is not answered since if half of the way is forbidden the entire way cannot be permitted.
⁹³ Chapter 1, Note 194.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:6:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:6:1)

**משנה:** רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר אֲפִילוּ אֵין בָּהּ אֶלָּא בוֹר וְשִׁיחַ וּמְעָרָה מְטַלְטְלִין בְּתוֹכָהּ. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אֲפִילוּ אֵין בָּהּ אַחַת מִכָּל אֵילּוּ מְטַלְטְלִין בְּתוֹכָהּ וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא שִׁבְעִים אַמָּה וְשִׁירַיִם עַל שִׁבְעִים אַמָּה וְשִׁירַיִם.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Rebbi Jehudah says, even if it only contains a cistern, or an irrigation ditch, or a cave, one carries in it. Rebbi Aqiba says, even if none of these is there one carries in it on condition that it be seventy cubits and a remainder by seventy cubits and a remainder¹¹. In an enclosed area of up to 2 *bet se’ah* one may carry. One of more than 2 *bet se’ah* may be turned into a domain for carrying only if it is used for human dwelling..

footnotes:
¹¹ Since 70.71…2 = 5’000, the area enclosed is 2 bet se’ah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:6:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:6:2)

**הלכה:** מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. אֵיזֶהוּ קַרְפֵּף. כָּל שֶׁהוּא סָמוּךְ לָעִיר. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוּדָה. וָכָא הוּא אוֹמֵר הָכֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. כְּבֵית דִּירָה עֲבִיד לָהּ רִבִּי יוּדָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** ⁹³ The opinion of Rebbi Jehudah seems inverted, as we have stated there, “what is a corral? Anything close to a village, the words of Rebbi Jehudah.” And here he says so? Rebbi Mana said, Rebbi Jehudah treated it as a house.

footnotes:
⁹³ Chapter 1, Note 194.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:7:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:7:1)

**משנה:** רִבִּי אֱלִעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר הָיָה אוֹרְכָּהּ יוֹתֵר עַל רָחְבָּהּ אֲפִילוּ אַמָּה אַחַת אֵין מְטַלְטְלִין בְּתוֹכָהּ. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר אֲפִילוּ אוֹרְכָּהּ כִּשְׁנַיִם בְּרוֹחְבָּהּ מְטַלְטְלִין בְּתוֹכָה:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Rebbi Eliezer says, if its length exceeds its width even by one cubit one may not carry there¹³. Rebbi Yose says, even if its length is twice its width one carries in there.

footnotes:
¹³ His reason is unknown. The statement is rejected in the Babli.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:7:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:7:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:7:2)

**הלכה:** פיס׳. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר אֲפִילוּ אֵין בָּהּ אֶלָּא כוֹר כול׳. תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר אִם הָיָה אָרְכָּהּ יוֹתֵר עַל רָחְבָּהּ אֲפִילוּ אַמָּה אַחַת אֵין מְטַלְטְלִין מִתּוֹכָהּ. וְהָדָא פְלִיגָא עַל דְּרִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר. אֲפִילוּ אָרְכָּהּ כִּשְׁנַיִם בְּרָחְבָּהּ מְטַלְטְלִין בְּתוֹכָה. הָדָא מְסַיְיעָא לְרִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. וְהָא תַנֵּי. כִּלְאַיִם בְּרוֹבַה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אוֹמֵר. אֲפִילוּ אָרְכָּהּ כִּשְׁנַיִם בְּרָחְבָּהּ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Paragraph. “Rebbi Jehudah says, even if it only contains a cistern,” etc. It was stated, “Rebbi Eliezer says, if its length exceeds its width even by one cubit one may not carry there¹³.” This disagrees with R. Jonathan⁹⁴. “Rebbi Yose says, even if its length is twice its width one carries in there,” this agrees with Rebbi Jonathan. We also have stated⁹⁵ 2:6: “How much is a *bet rova`*? 10.5 cubits square, Rebbi Yose says even if its length is twice its width.” The quarter is a quarter *qav*, 1/24 of a *se’ah*. Therefore a *bet qav* = 2500/24 = 104.1667 square cubits or 10.206², somewhat less than the 10.5² given in the Tosephta. The quote shows that R. Yose consistently considers “squares” mentioned in legal contexts as measures of area, rather than geometric squares., “*Kilaim* in a quarter⁹⁶. Rebbi Yose says, even if its length is twice its width.”

footnotes:
¹³ His reason is unknown. The statement is rejected in the Babli.
⁹⁴ Who said earlier (Note 81) that one inferred from the courtyard of the Tabernacle whose sides were in ratio 1:2.
⁹⁵ The reference is to a statement close to Tosephta Kilaim
⁹⁶ Read רובע for רובה.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:8:1)

**משנה:** אָמַר רִבִּי אִלְעַאי שָׁמַעְתִּי מֵרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אֲפִילוּ הִיא כְבֵית כּוֹר. וְכֵן שָׁמַעְתִּי מִמֶּנּוּ אַנְשֵׁי חָצֵר שֶׁשָּׁכַח אֶחָד מֵהֶן וְלֹא עֵירֵב בֵּיתוֹ אָסוּר מִלְּהַכְנִיס וּמִלְּהוֹצִיא לוֹ אֲבָל לָהֶן מּוּתָּר. וְכֵן שָׁמַעְתִּי מִמֶּנּוּ שֶׁיוֹצְאִין בְּעַרְקְבָנִין בַּפֶּסַח וְחִיזַּרְתִּי עַל כָּל תַּלְמִידָיו וּבִיקַּשְׁתִּי לִי חָבֵר וְלֹא מָצָאתִי:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Rebbi Illai said, I heard from Rebbi Eliezer: Even if it is a *bet kor*⁹⁷. If the entire area was fenced in and there was an area smaller than two *bet se’ah* somehow separated from the entire area, such as a hill, or a depression, or a cave, one may carry in that separate area because of the fence around the entire area., and I also heard from him that if one of the dwellers in a courtyard had forgotten to make an *eruv* he is forbidden to bring into or bring out of his house but to others it is permitted¹⁴. I also heard from him that one may satisfy one’s obligation on Passover with white stone-crop¹⁵. I asked around among all his students to find support but did not find any¹⁶.

footnotes:
⁹⁷ R. Eliezer never permitted carrying in a corral which does not contain a human dwelling and which is larger than two bet se’ah
¹⁴ Whereas for the majority nobody may carry in and out of the courtyard unless the non-participant annulled his rights (Chapter 1, Note 112).
¹⁵ A medicinal plant which he authorizes as “bitter herb” for the Seder night.
¹⁶ Therefore these statements are not authoritative.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:8:2)

**הלכה:** פיס׳. אָמַר רִבִּי אִלְעַאי שָׁמַעְתִּי מֵרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. בְּמִתְלַקֶּטֶת סְאָתַיִם מִבֵּית כּוֹר הִיא מַתְנִיתָא.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Paragraph. “Rebbi Illai said, I heard from Rebbi Eliezer:” Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, this Mishnah is about two *bet seah* collected from the *bet kor*⁹⁷. If the entire area was fenced in and there was an area smaller than two *bet se’ah* somehow separated from the entire area, such as a hill, or a depression, or a cave, one may carry in that separate area because of the fence around the entire area..

footnotes:
⁹⁷ R. Eliezer never permitted carrying in a corral which does not contain a human dwelling and which is larger than two bet se’ah


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:8:3)

וְכֵן שָׁמַעְתִּי מִמֶּנּוּ. אַנְשֵׁי חָצֵר שֶׁשָּׁכַח אֶחָד מֵהֶן וְלֹא עֵירֵב. בֵּיתוֹ אָסוּר. תַּמָּן רַבָּנִן. בְּרַם הָכָא רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. רַבָּנִן אָמְרֵי. אָדָם מְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת בֵּיתוֹ וְאֵין אָדָם מְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת חֲצֵירוֹ. רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאָדָם מְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת בֵּיתוֹ כָּךְ מְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת חֲצֵירוֹ. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר יֵיעָשֶׂה כְאַכְסְנַאי וִיהֵא מוּתָּר. רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר אָדָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֵּן לָקִישׁ. קְנָס קְנָסוֹ רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. רִבִּי שַׁמַּי בָעֵי. דָּבָר מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן קוֹנְסִין לוֹ בְשׁוֹגֵג כְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר. רִבִּי בָּא בָּרֵיהּ דְּרַב פַּפַּי בָעֵי. אָמַר. הֲרֵינִי מְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת בֵּיתִי. אוֹף רַבָּנִן מוֹדֵיי. אָמַר. הֲרֵינִי מְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת חֲצֵירִי. אוֹף רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר מוֹדֵה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“And also I heard from him that if one of the dwellers in a courtyard had forgotten to make an *eruv* he is forbidden [to bring into] his house.” There it follows the rabbis, here Rebbi Eliezer⁹⁸. The rabbis say, a person may annul his right to his house but not his right to his courtyard⁹⁹, “annulling one’s right” means asking not to be counted. This permits the other parties to establish an *eruv* without his participation; he will have no right to use the *eruv*.. Rebbi Eliezer says, just as a person may annul his right to his house so he may annul his right to his courtyard. According to Rebbi Eliezer, could he not be treated like a guest¹⁰⁰. and be permitted? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Rebbi Eliezer fined him¹⁰¹ should be fined.. Rebbi Shammai asked, according to Rebbi Eliezer, does one fine anybody in error about a matter of their words¹⁰²? Rebbi Abba the son of Rav Pappai asked, if somebody said, I am annulling the right to my house, would the rabbis agree? If somebody said, I am annulling the right to my courtyard, would Rebbi Eliezer agree?

footnotes:
⁹⁸ The rabbis in Mishnah 6:3 forbid his house to him and everybody else and permit other houses opening to the same courtyard to him and everybody else.
⁹⁹ This has to read: “The rabbis say, a person may annul his right to his courtyard but not his right to his house.” In the matter of eruvin
¹⁰⁰ An Aramaic word derived from Greek ξένος, ὁ “stranger”. A guest who has no property rights in the courtyard is irrelevant for the eruv
¹⁰¹ The answer to the question in theory is positive but R. Eliezer holds that the person forgetting an eruv
¹⁰² Since by biblical law one could carry in the common courtyard, R. Eliezer’s restriction seems to be contrary to the rules.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Eruvin 2:8:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Eruvin/r/2:8:4)

וְכֵן שָׁמַעְתִּי מִמֶּנּוּ שֶׁיוֹצְאִין בְּעַרְקְבָנִין בַּפֶּסַח. הֲוִינָן סָבְרִין מֵימַר. בְּעַרְקְבָנִין. אַשְׁכַּח תַּנֵּי. עַל כּוּלְּהֹן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“Also I heard from him that one may satisfy one’s obligation on Passover with white stone-crop¹⁵.” They were of the opinion to say, about white stone-crop. It was found stated, about all of them¹⁰³.

footnotes:
¹⁵ A medicinal plant which he authorizes as “bitter herb” for the Seder night.
¹⁰³ All statements of R. Illay are unsupported.