## Mishneh Torah, Eruvin Chapter 4

###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:1
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:1)

אַנְּשֵׁי חָצֵר שֶׁהָיוּ כֻּלָּם אוֹכְלִין עַל שֻׁלְחָן אֶחָד אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד יֵשׁ לוֹ בַּיִת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ אֵין צְרִיכִין עֵרוּב מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן כְּאַנְשֵׁי בַּיִת אֶחָד. וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם וּבְנֵי בֵּיתוֹ וַעֲבָדָיו אוֹסְרִין עָלָיו וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְעָרֵב עִמָּהֶן כָּךְ אֵלּוּ כְּאַנְשֵׁי בַּיִת אֶחָד הֵן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן כֻּלָּן סוֹמְכִין עַל שֻׁלְחָן אֶחָד:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
When the inhabitants of a courtyard eat at the same table¹ explains that the Rambam's wording is not to be understood literally; if people eat in the same room, even if they eat at different tables - indeed, even if they eat their own food - they are not required to establish an *eruv*. These concepts are also reflected in the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (*Eruvin* 6:7) and quoted as halachah by the Ramah (*Orach Chayim* 370:4).
The most common application of this concept today would be a hotel or a bungalow colony, where many people eat in the same dining room, and yet have their own private rooms or dwellings. - even though they have their own individual dwellings - they are not required to establish an *eruv*; they are considered to be the inhabitants of a single household.
Just as the presence of a person's wife, the members of his household, or his servants does not cause him to be forbidden [to carry], nor does their presence make an *eruv* necessary, so too, these individuals are considered to be the members of a single household, for they all eat at the same table.²

footnotes:
¹ The Kessef Mishneh
² This highlights the principle that it is the place where a person eats, and not where he sleeps, that is most significant in defining his place of residence.


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:2
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:2)

וְכֵן אִם הֻצְרְכוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת עֵרוּב עִם אַנְשֵׁי חָצֵר אַחֶרֶת עֵרוּב אֶחָד לְכֻלָּן וּפַת אַחַת בִּלְבַד מוֹלִיכִין לְאוֹתוֹ מָקוֹם שֶׁמְּעָרְבִין עִמּוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה הָעֵרוּב בָּא אֶצְלָן אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְעָרֵב כְּמוֹ הַבַּיִת שֶׁמַּנִּיחִין בּוֹ הָעֵרוּב שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִתֵּן אֶת הַפַּת שֶׁכָּל אֵלּוּ הַבָּתִּים כְּבַיִת אֶחָד הֵן חֲשׁוּבִין:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
Similarly, if [the inhabitants of this courtyard] must establish an *eruv* together with the inhabitants of another courtyard, they are required to bring only one loaf to the place where the *eruv* is established.³ is required to contribute a loaf of bread. Nevertheless, in this instance, since all the inhabitants of the courtyard are considered to be members of a single household, only one loaf is required.
Similarly, if the *eruv* is established in their [house], they do not have to contribute to the *eruv*, just as the house in which an *eruv* is placed does not have to contribute a loaf of bread. [The rationale for both these laws is] that all these dwellings are considered to be a single dwelling.

footnotes:
³ In Chapter 1, Halachah 15, the Rambam states that every household participating in the eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:3
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:3)

וְכֵן אַנְשֵׁי חָצֵר שֶׁעֵרְבוּ נַעֲשׂוּ כֻּלָּן כְּבַיִת אֶחָד. וְאִם הֻצְרְכוּ לְעָרֵב עִם חָצֵר שְׁנִיָּה כִּכָּר אֶחָד בִּלְבַד הוּא שֶׁמּוֹלִיכִין עַל יְדֵי כֻּלָּן לַמָּקוֹם שֶׁמְּעָרְבִין בּוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה הָעֵרוּב בָּא אֶצְלָן אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לִתֵּן פַּת:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
Similarly, the inhabitants of a courtyard who established an *eruv* together are considered to be [the members of] a single household.⁴ causes them to be considered as if they share the same table. If it is necessary for them to establish an *eruv* together with the inhabitants of another courtyard, they are required to bring only one loaf to the place where the *eruv* is established. Similarly, if the *eruv* is established in their [house], they do not have to contribute a loaf of bread.

footnotes:
⁴ Although they eat in separate places, joining together in the eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:4
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:4)

חֲמִשָּׁה שֶׁגָּבוּ אֶת הָעֵרוּב לְהוֹלִיכוֹ לְמָקוֹם שֶׁמַּנִּיחִין בּוֹ הָעֵרוּב כְּשֶׁהֵם מוֹלִיכִין אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְהוֹלִיךְ עַל יְדֵי חֲמִשְּׁתָּן אֶלָּא כִּכָּר אַחַת שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁגָּבוּ כֻּלָּן נַעֲשׂוּ כְּאַנְשֵׁי בַּיִת אֶחָד:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
When five people collect an *eruv*⁵ [for one courtyard] with the intent of bringing it to the place where an *eruv* will be established [together with the inhabitants of another courtyard],⁶ explains that this latter phrase represents the new concept contributed in this halachah, as opposed to the previous one. Although the *eruv* was originally collected for the purpose of establishing an *eruv* with the inhabitants of another courtyard, the collection itself causes the inhabitants to be considered members of a single household. it is not necessary for all five to bring the bread there. Moreover, all th at is necessary is to bring a single loaf of bread. Since the *eruv* was collected, all [the inhabitants of the courtyard] are considered to be the members of a single household.

footnotes:
⁵ I.e., they collected loaves of bread from each household in the courtyard.
⁶ The Shem Yosef


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:5
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:5)

הָאָב וּבְנוֹ וְהָרַב וְתַלְמִידוֹ שֶׁהֵן שְׁרוּיִין בְּחָצֵר אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְעָרֵב מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן כְּבַיִת אֶחָד. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁפְּעָמִים אוֹכְלִין עַל שֻׁלְחָן אֶחָד וּפְעָמִים אֵינָן אוֹכְלִין הֲרֵי הֵן כְּבַיִת אֶחָד:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
When a father and his son, or a teacher and his student⁷are dwelling in the same courtyard, it is not necessary for them to establish an *eruv*; they are considered to be a single household. Although at times they eat at a single table and at times they do not eat [together], they are considered to be a single household.

footnotes:
⁷ Although the Rambam uses a singular term, the same law applies to many sons or many students.


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:6
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:6)

הָאַחִים שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם לוֹ בַּיִת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְאֵינָן סוֹמְכִין עַל שֻׁלְחַן אֲבִיהֶן. וְכֵן הַנָּשִׁים אוֹ הָעֲבָדִים שֶׁאֵינָן סוֹמְכִין עַל שֻׁלְחַן בַּעֲלֵיהֶן אוֹ רַבָּן תָּמִיד אֲבָל אוֹכְלִין הֵם עַל שֻׁלְחָנוֹ בִּשְׂכַר מְלָאכָה שֶׁעוֹשִׂין לוֹ אוֹ בְּטוֹבָה יָמִים יְדוּעִין כְּמִי שֶׁסּוֹעֵד אֵצֶל חֲבֵרוֹ שָׁבוּעַ אוֹ חֹדֶשׁ. אִם אֵין עִמָּהֶן דִּיּוּרִין אֲחֵרִים בֶּחָצֵר אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְעָרֵב. וְאִם עֵרְבוּ עִם חָצֵר אַחֶרֶת עֵרוּב אֶחָד לְכֻלָּן. וְאִם בָּא הָעֵרוּב אֶצְלָן אֵין נוֹתְנִין פַּת. וְאִם הָיוּ דִּיּוּרִין עִמָּהֶן בֶּחָצֵר צְרִיכִין פַּת לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד כִּשְׁאָר אַנְשֵׁי הֶחָצֵר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינָן סוֹמְכִין עַל שֻׁלְחָן אֶחָד תָּמִיד:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply to] brothers, each of whom has a house of his own, and who do not eat at their father's table, and to wives and servants who do not eat at their husband's or master's table at all times, but rather they [occasionally] eat at his table in payment for the work they do for him,⁸ 73a. The Ra'avad offers a different interpretation, and his view is quoted in the *Shulchan Aruch* (*Orach Chayim* 370:5- 6). or as an expression of his favor for a specific amount of time, such as a person who enjoys a colleague's hospitality for a week or a month.⁹ explains that the Rambam's intent is not that the presence of a guest causes carrying to be forbidden when there are others living in the same courtyard. For as explained at the beginning of Chapter 2, and in Halachah 12 of this chapter, a guest's presence makes no difference in this context. Rather, the point of the comparison above is to emphasize the intermediate status of these individuals. On one hand, like guests, they are at times considered to be members of the person's household. On the other hand, since they have their own dwellings and often eat there, there is reason to consider them as having separate households.
If there are no other people dwelling together with them in the courtyard, they are not required to establish an *eruv*. If they establish an *eruv* with [the inhabitants of] another courtyard, a single *eruv* suffices for them. If the *eruv* is established in [one of] their [homes], they are not required to contribute a loaf of bread.
If there are other people living in the courtyard together with them, each of them is required to contribute a loaf of bread [for the *eruv*] like the other inhabitants of the courtyard. [The rationale is that] they do not eat at one table at all times.

footnotes:
⁸ The Rambam's comparison of these individuals to hired workers reflects his interpretation of the expression במקבלי פרס in Eruvin
⁹ The Maggid Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:7
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:7)

חָמֵשׁ חֲבוּרוֹת שֶׁשָּׁבְתוּ בִּטְרַקְלִין אֶחָד. אִם הָיָה מַפְסִיק בֵּין כָּל חֲבוּרָה וַחֲבוּרָה מְחִצָּה הַמַּגַּעַת לַתִּקְרָה הֲרֵי כָּל חֲבוּרָה מֵהֶן כְּאִלּוּ הִיא בְּחֶדֶר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ אוֹ בַּעֲלִיָּה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ לְפִיכָךְ צְרִיכִין פַּת מִכָּל חֲבוּרָה. וְאִם אֵין הַמְּחִצּוֹת מַגִּיעוֹת לַתִּקְרָה כִּכָּר אֶחָד לְכֻלָּן שֶׁכֻּלָּן כְּאַנְשֵׁי בַּיִת אֶחָד חֲשׁוּבִין:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] five groups spend the Sabbath together in a single large hall: If a partition that reaches the ceiling¹⁰ cites the Rashba, who explains that it is sufficient for the partitions to reach within three handbreadths of the ceiling, since, based on the principle of *l'vud*, when they are that close it is considered as if they reached the ceiling itself. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Orach Chayim* 370:3) quotes this ruling. separates each of the groups [from the others], it is as if each group has a room of its own, or is in a loft of its own. In such an instance, every group must contribute a loaf of bread. If, however, the partition does not reach the ceiling, a single loaf¹¹. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*loc. cit.*) differs and (following the interpretation of *Tosafot, Eruvin* 72a and Rabbenu Asher) does not require an *eruv* at all unless they want to join with others outside the hall.
The *Shulchan Aruch*, however, emphasizes that we are speaking about temporary partitions, either curtains or pieces of wood. If the partitions are permanent, they are considered as having separate dwellings, and an *eruv* is required.of bread is sufficient for all of them. For they are all considered to be the members of a single household.

footnotes:
¹⁰ The Maggid Mishneh
¹¹ I.e., they must make an eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:8
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:8)

מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בַּחֲצַר חֲבֵרוֹ בֵּית שַׁעַר שֶׁרַבִּים דּוֹרְסִין בּוֹ אוֹ אַכְסַדְרָה אוֹ מִרְפֶּסֶת אוֹ בֵּית הַבָּקָר אוֹ בֵּית הַתֶּבֶן אוֹ בֵּית הָעֵצִים אוֹ אוֹצָר הֲרֵי זֶה אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר עָלָיו עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לוֹ עִמּוֹ בֶּחָצֵר מְקוֹם דִּירָה שֶׁהוּא סוֹמֵךְ עָלָיו לֶאֱכל בּוֹ פִּתּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִהְיֶה אוֹסֵר עָלָיו עַד שֶׁיְּעָרֵב עִמּוֹ. אֲבָל מְקוֹם לִינָה אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר. לְפִיכָךְ אִם קָבַע לוֹ מָקוֹם לֶאֱכל בּוֹ בְּבֵית שַׁעַר אוֹ בְּאַכְסַדְרָה וּמִרְפֶּסֶת אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר עָלָיו לְפִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְקוֹם דִּירָה:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
When a person owns one [of the following] structures¹² - a gatehouse that people frequently walk through, an *exedra*,¹³a porch, a barn, a shed for straw, a shed for wood, or a storehouse - in a courtyard belonging to a colleague, he does not cause [his colleague] to be forbidden to carry. [Our Sages decreed that the presence of a person causes carrying] to be forbidden unless an *eruv* is established, only when the person possesses a dwelling in the courtyard in which he will [ordinarily] eat [a meal of] bread. The [possession of a] place to sleep, by contrast, does not cause carrying to be forbidden.
For this reason, even if a person decided to eat his meals consistently in a gatehouse or an *exedra*, his presence does not cause carrying to be forbidden, because this is not considered a dwelling.¹⁴ is necessary (*Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim* 370:1; see Chapter 1, Halachah 16).

footnotes:
¹² All these structures have one thing in common - they are not ordinary dwellings where a person will eat his meals on a regular basis.
¹³ A Greek structure with two or three walls and a roof with a sky-light.
¹⁴ For these structures are not fit to serve as dwellings. In contrast, were a person to eat continually in a barn, a wood shed, or a shed for straw, these are considered to be dwellings, and an eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:9
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:9)

עֲשָׂרָה בָּתִּים זֶה לִפְנִים מִזֶּה הַבַּיִת הַפְּנִימִי וְהַשֵּׁנִי לוֹ הֵם שֶׁנּוֹתְנִין אֶת הָעֵרוּב וְהַשְּׁמוֹנָה בָּתִּים הַחִיצוֹנִים אֵינָן נוֹתְנִין אֶת הָעֵרוּב הוֹאִיל וְרַבִּים דּוֹרְסִין בָּהֶן הֲרֵי הֵן כְּבֵית שַׁעַר וְהַדָּר בְּבֵית שַׁעַר אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר. אֲבָל הַתְּשִׁיעִי אֵין דּוֹרְסִין בּוֹ רַבִּים אֶלָּא יָחִיד לְפִיכָךְ אוֹסֵר עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן עֵרוּבוֹ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] there are ten dwellings, one within the other:¹⁵ [The inhabitants of] the innermost dwelling and the one before it are required to provide the *eruv*. The eight outer dwellings, by contrast, are not required to contribute to the *eruv*. [The rationale is that] since many people walk through them, they are regarded as a gatehouse. [As mentioned above,] a person who lives in a gatehouse [does not cause others to be forbidden to carry].¹⁶ 370:52 extends this principle and applies it to people renting separate rooms in a single home. If the rooms lead through each other, the inhabitants of the outer rooms do not have to contribute to the *eruv*.
[The person living in] the ninth [house] does not have many people passing through his property - only one. Therefore, his presence causes [carrying] to be forbidden unless he contributes to the *eruv*.

footnotes:
¹⁵ I.e., to get to the inner dwellings, one must pass through the outer ones.
¹⁶ The Mishnah Berurah


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:10
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:10)

שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת וּבֵינֵיהֶן שְׁלֹשָׁה בָּתִּים פְּתוּחִים זֶה לָזֶה וּפְתוּחִים לַחֲצֵרוֹת וְהֵבִיאוּ בְּנֵי חָצֵר זוֹ עֵרוּבָן דֶּרֶךְ הַבַּיִת הַפָּתוּחַ לָהֶן וְהִנִּיחוּהוּ בְּבַיִת אֶמְצָעִי. וְכֵן הֵבִיאוּ בְּנֵי הֶחָצֵר הָאַחֵר עֵרוּבָן דֶּרֶךְ הַפָּתוּחַ לָהֶן וְהִנִּיחוּהוּ בַּבַּיִת הָאֶמְצָעִי. אוֹתָן הַשְּׁלֹשָׁה בָּתִּים אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לִתֵּן אֶת הַפַּת. הָאֶמְצָעִי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִנִּיחוּ בּוֹ הָעֵרוּב וְהַשְּׁנַיִם שֶׁמִּצְּדָדָיו מִפְּנֵי שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן בֵּית שַׁעַר לְאַנְשֵׁי חָצֵר:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rulings apply in the situation to be described:] There are two courtyards [each containing several houses] and three houses [in between them]. The houses have entrances to each other, and [the outer two houses]¹⁷ have entrances to the courtyards.
The inhabitants of one courtyard brought their *eruv* through the house that had an entrance for them and placed it in the middle house. Similarly, the inhabitants of the other courtyard brought their *eruv* through the house that had an entrance for them and placed it in the middle house.
[The inhabitants of] these three houses do not have to contribute a loaf of bread [to the *eruv* [for the following reasons]: The middle house is the house in which the *eruv* was placed. The two houses on its side are each considered to be a gatehouse for the inhabitants of the courtyard.

footnotes:
¹⁷ But not the middle house. See the accompanying diagram.


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:11
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:11)

שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת וּשְׁנֵי בָּתִּים פְּתוּחִין זֶה לָזֶה בֵּינֵיהֶן וְהֵבִיאוּ אֵלּוּ עֵרוּבָן דֶּרֶךְ הַבַּיִת הַפָּתוּחַ לָהֶן וְהִנִּיחוּהוּ בַּבַּיִת הַשֵּׁנִי הַסָּמוּךְ לֶחָצֵר הָאַחֶרֶת וְהֵבִיאוּ אֵלּוּ עֵרוּבָן דֶּרֶךְ הַפֶּתַח הַסָּמוּךְ לָהֶן וְהִנִּיחוּהוּ בַּבַּיִת הָאַחֵר. שְׁתֵּיהֶן לֹא קָנוּ עֵרוּב. שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן הִנִּיחַ עֵרוּבוֹ בְּבֵית שַׁעַר שֶׁל חָצֵר אַחֶרֶת:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[Different rules apply, however, if the situation changes. For example,] there are two courtyards [each containing several houses] and two houses [in between them] with entrances to each other. [The inhabitants of one courtyard] bring their *eruv* through the house that is open to them and place it in the second house, which is adjacent to the other courtyard.
[The inhabitants of the other courtyard also] bring their *eruv* through the entrance that is open to them and place it in the other house [which is adjacent to the other courtyard]. In such a situation, [the inhabitants of] neither [of the courtyards are considered to have] established an *eruv*. For each of them has placed his *eruv* in the gatehouse of another courtyard.¹⁸ that was placed in a gatehouse is not acceptable, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 16.

footnotes:
¹⁸ And an eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:12
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:12)

אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי הֶחָצֵר שֶׁהָיָה גּוֹסֵס אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִחְיוֹת בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹסֵר עַל בְּנֵי הֶחָצֵר עַד שֶׁיְּזַכּוּ לוֹ בְּפַת וִיעָרְבוּ עָלָיו. וְכֵן קָטָן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לֶאֱכל כַּזַּיִת הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹסֵר עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ עָלָיו. אֲבָל הָאוֹרֵחַ אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר לְעוֹלָם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
Although one of the inhabitants of a courtyard is in the midst of his death throes,¹⁹ even when [it is obvious] that he will not survive the day, his presence causes the other inhabitants of the courtyard to be forbidden [to carry] until they grant him [by proxy]²⁰ a share in a loaf of bread and include him in the *eruv*.
Similarly, when a minor [owns a house in the courtyard], although he is incapable of eating an amount of food the size of an olive, his presence causes [carrying] to be forbidden until [the inhabitants of the courtyard] include him in the *eruv*. [The presence of] a guest, by contrast, does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden, as explained above.²¹

footnotes:
¹⁹ This reflects a general principle in Torah law. Until a person actually stops breathing, he is considered to be alive. There is no difference in his status regarding any of the Torah's laws.
²⁰ See Chapter 1, Halachah 20.
²¹ See Chapter 2, Halachah 1.


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:13
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:13)

אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי חָצֵר שֶׁהִנִּיחַ בֵּיתוֹ וְהָלַךְ וְשָׁבַת בְּחָצֵר אַחֶרֶת אֲפִלּוּ הָיְתָה סְמוּכָה לַחֲצֵרוֹ. אִם הִסִּיעַ מִלִּבּוֹ וְאֵין דַּעְתּוֹ לַחֲזֹר לְבֵיתוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת הֲרֵי זֶה אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶן. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. אֲבָל עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים אֲפִלּוּ הָלַךְ לִשְׁבֹּת בְּעִיר אַחֶרֶת אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶן עַד שֶׁיִּשְׂכְּרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ מְקוֹמוֹ שֶׁהֲרֵי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיָּבוֹא בְּשַׁבָּת:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] one of the inhabitants of a courtyard leaves his home and spends the Sabbath in another courtyard, even in a courtyard adjacent [to the one in which his home is located]: If he had no thought of returning to his home on the Sabbath, he does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden.²² 371:1; *Mishnah Berurah* 371:1).
When does the above apply? With regard to a Jew.²³). With regard to a gentile, by contrast, he causes [carrying] to be forbidden even when he spends the Sabbath in another city,²⁴ mentions a more lenient view, which states that if the gentile spends the Sabbath at a place that is more than a day's journey from home, the inhabitants are allowed to carry, because it is impossible for him to arrive on the Sabbath. This ruling is quoted by the *Shulchan Aruch* (*Orach Chayim* 371:1).
The Ramah grants a further leniency and permits the inhabitants to carry when the gentile stays in another courtyard in the same city. If the gentile returns to his home on the Sabbath, the *Turei Zahav* 371:2 permits the inhabitants to continue to carry. The *Mishnah Berurah* 371:8, by contrast, rules that this is forbidden. unless his domain is rented from him. [The rationale is] that it is possible for him to return on the Sabbath.

footnotes:
²² The rationale is that a dwelling without an owner is not considered to be a dwelling (Shulchan Aruch HaRav
²³ For it is unlikely that a Jew will return to his home on the Sabbath. Moreover, even if he did so, we apply the principle that since carrying was permitted for a portion of the Sabbath, it is permitted for the entire Sabbath (Maggid Mishneh
²⁴ The Maggid Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:14
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:14)

בַּעַל הֶחָצֵר שֶׁהִשְׂכִּיר מִבָּתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹ לַאֲחֵרִים וְהִנִּיחַ לוֹ כֵּלִים אוֹ מִינֵי סְחוֹרָה בְּכָל בַּיִת וּבַיִת מֵהֶן אֵינָן אוֹסְרִין עָלָיו הוֹאִיל וְיֵשׁ לוֹ תְּפִיסַת יָד בְּכָל בַּיִת מֵהֶן נַעֲשׂוּ הַכּל כְּאוֹרְחִין אֶצְלוֹ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁהִנִּיחַ שָׁם דָּבָר שֶׁאָסוּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת כְּגוֹן טֶבֶל וַעֲשָׁשִׁיּוֹת. אֲבָל אִם נִשְׁאַר לוֹ בְּכָל בַּיִת מֵהֶן כֵּלִים שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְטַלְטְלָן הוֹאִיל וְאֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיּוֹצִיאֵם הַיּוֹם וְלֹא יִשָּׁאֵר לוֹ שָׁם תְּפִיסַת יָד הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אוֹסְרִין עָלָיו עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
When the owner of a courtyard rents houses in the courtyard to others and [stipulates that] he may [continue] to leave articles or types of merchandise in each of these homes, [the presence of the renters] does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden. Since he still has authority in each of the houses, everyone is considered to be his guest.²⁵ 370:2), which states that this decision applies only when there are no other inhabitants in the courtyard besides the owner and the persons to whom he rented dwellings, or the *eruv* was brought into the house of the owner.
When does the above apply? When he left an article that may not be carried²⁶ (*loc. cit.*) adds that this applies also when the articles are too heavy to be lifted on the Sabbath. on the Sabbath - e.g., *tevel*²⁷ and the tithes have not been separated. These tithes may not be separated on the Sabbath (*Hilchot Shabbat* 23:9,14), nor is it permitted to carry such produce on the Sabbath (*loc. cit.* 25:19). or slabs of metal,²⁸:6). in these homes. When, by contrast, he leaves articles that may be carried in each of the homes, [the presence of the renters] causes [carrying] to be forbidden unless they establish an *eruv*. For it is possible that he will remove them [on the Sabbath], and then he will be left without any authority [in these dwellings].

footnotes:
²⁵ Note the ruling of the Ramah (Orach Chayim
²⁶ The Shulchan Aruch
²⁷ Produce from which terumah
²⁸ Since this metal has not been fashioned into a useful article, it is forbidden to be carried on the Sabbath (loc. cit.


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:15
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:15)

אַנְשֵׁי הֶחָצֵר שֶׁשָּׁכְחוּ וְלֹא עֵרְבוּ אֵין מוֹצִיאִים מִבָּתִּים לְחָצֵר וְלֹא מֵחָצֵר לְבָתִּים אֲבָל מְטַלְטְלִין הֵן כֵּלִים שֶׁשָּׁבְתוּ בֶּחָצֵר בְּכָל הֶחָצֵר וּבְכָל הַנֶּחְשָׁב עִם הֶחָצֵר. וְאִם הָיְתָה שָׁם מִרְפֶּסֶת אוֹ עֲלִיָּה וְעֵרְבוּ אַנְשֵׁי הֶחָצֵר לְעַצְמָן וְאַנְשֵׁי הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת לְעַצְמָן. אַנְשֵׁי הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת אוֹ אַנְשֵׁי הָעֲלִיָּה מְטַלְטְלִין כֵּלִים שֶׁשָּׁבְתוּ בְּבָתֵּיהֶן בְּכָל הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת וּבְכָל הַנֶּחְשָׁב עִמָּהּ אוֹ בְּכָל רֹחַב הָעֲלִיָּה וּבְכָל הַנֶּחְשָׁב עִמָּהּ. וְאַנְשֵׁי הֶחָצֵר מְטַלְטְלִין בְּכָל הֶחָצֵר וּבְכָל הַנֶּחְשָׁב עִמָּהּ. וְכֵן אִם הָיָה יָחִיד דָּר בְּחָצֵר וְיָחִיד דָּר בַּעֲלִיָּה וְשָׁכְחוּ וְלֹא עֵרְבוּ. זֶה מְטַלְטֵל בְּכָל הָעֲלִיָּה וְהַנֶּחְשָׁב עִמָּהּ וְזֶה מְטַלְטֵל בְּכָל הֶחָצֵר וְהַנֶּחְשָׁב עִמָּהּ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] the inhabitants of a courtyard forgot and did not establish an *eruv*. They may not remove articles from their homes to the courtyard, nor from the courtyard to their homes. However, concerning articles that were left in the courtyard at the commencement of the Sabbath:²⁹ 372, which explains there are authorities who differ with regard to whether one is permitted to carry an article within a courtyard when an *eruv* has not been established - if that article hads been placed in one of the homes at the commencement of the Sabbath, but was inadvertently taken from the home and placed in the courtyard. Although the Rambam would appear to forbid carrying the article, Rashi (*Shabbat* 130b) and *Tosafot* (*Eruvin* 91b) maintain that carrying it is permitted within the courtyard. [the inhabitants] may carry such articles throughout the courtyard and all its extensions.³⁰
[The following rules apply when] there is a porch³¹ 8:3), the Rambam describes a porch as an intermediate level, at least ten handbreadths high, through which stairs lead to the courtyard. or an upper storey [that opens out to a courtyard],³² and the inhabitants of the courtyard have established an *eruv* for themselves and the inhabitants of the porch have established an *eruv* for themselves:³³ is established, the inhabitants of these domains are forbidden to carry within the others' domains and within the property shared by both. Regarding articles that were left in their homes at the beginning of the Sabbath, the inhabitants of the porch or the upper storey are permitted to carry them throughout the porch and all of its extensions or throughout the upper storey and all of its extensions. The inhabitants of the courtyard may carry within the courtyard and all its extensions, [but they are forbidden to carry from the courtyard to the upper storey or the porch, or from the upper storey or the porch to the courtyard unless an *eruv* is established].
Similarly, if one person lives in the courtyard, and another person lives in the upper storey, and they forgot to establish an *eruv*, the owner of the upper storey may carry within the upper storey and all of its extensions, and the owner of the courtyard may carry within the courtyard and all of its extensions. [They may not, however, carry from one domain to the other without an *eruv*].

footnotes:
²⁹ See the Be'ur Halachah
³⁰ See Chapter 3, Halachah 19.
³¹ In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Eruvin
³² I.e., the inhabitants of the porch or the upper storey descend through a stairwell into the courtyard, and from the courtyard they proceed to the public domain. The Rabbis consider the stairwell equivalent to an entrance. Hence, they liken the situation to one in which two courtyards are positioned adjacent to each other with an entrance between them.
³³ I.e., unless an eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:16
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:16)

כֵּיצַד. הַסֶּלַע אוֹ תֵּל וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ שֶׁבְּתוֹךְ הֶחָצֵר אִם אֵינָן גְּבוֹהִין עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶחְשָׁבִין בֵּין הֶחָצֵר וּבֵין הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת וּשְׁנֵיהֶן אֲסוּרִין לְהוֹצִיא שָׁם כֵּלִים שֶׁבַּבָּתִּים. וְאִם גְּבוֹהִין עֲשָׂרָה וְהָיָה בֵּינֵיהֶן וּבֵין הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת פָּחוֹת מֵאַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶחְשָׁבִין עִם הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵן שָׁוִין לָהּ וּבְנֵי מִרְפֶּסֶת מֻתָּרִין בָּהֶם. וְאִם הָיוּ רְחוֹקִין מִן הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים אוֹ יֶתֶר עַל כֵּן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁגְּבוֹהִין עֲשָׂרָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ בִּכְלַל הֶחָצֵר וְהַמִּרְפֶּסֶת לְפִי שֶּׁשְּׁנֵיהֶן אֶפְשָׁר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי זְרִיקָה. לְפִיכָךְ שְׁנֵיהֶן אֲסוּרִין לְהוֹצִיא לְשָׁם כְּלֵי הַבָּתִּים עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ. הָיְתָה מַצֵּבָה רְחָבָה אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים לִפְנֵי הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת אֵין הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת אוֹסֶרֶת עַל בְּנֵי הֶחָצֵר שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶחְלְקָה מֵהֶן:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
What is implied? When there is a rock or a mound within the courtyard that is less than ten handbreadths high, it is considered to be [important to] both the courtyard and the porch, and [the inhabitants of] both are forbidden to bring articles there from their homes.
If [the rock or the mound] is ten handbreadths high and is less than four handbreadths removed from the porch, it is considered to be an extension of the porch, for they are of similar [height]. Therefore, the inhabitants of the porch may carry on it.
If it is four or more handbreadths removed from the porch, even when it is ten [handbreadths high] it is considered to be an extension of both the courtyard and the porch, since both can use it by throwing [objects onto it]. Therefore, [the inhabitants of] both are forbidden to bring articles there from their homes until they establish an *eruv*.
When there is a pillar four [or more] handbreadths wide in front of the porch [it is considered to be a divider]. [Therefore, the presence of] the porch does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden within the courtyard, for a separation has been made between [one domain and the other].


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:17
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:17)

זִיזִין הַיּוֹצְאִין מִן הַכְּתָלִים. כָּל שֶׁהוּא לְמַטָּה מֵעֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים הֲרֵי זֶה נֶחְשָׁב מִן הֶחָצֵר וּבְנֵי הֶחָצֵר מִשְׁתַּמְּשִׁין בּוֹ. וְכָל שֶׁהוּא בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים הַסְּמוּכִין לַעֲלִיָּה. אַנְשֵׁי עֲלִיָּה מִשְׁתַּמְּשִׁין בּוֹ וְהַנִּשְׁאָר בֵּין עֲשָׂרָה הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים עַד תְּחִלַּת עֲשָׂרָה הָעֶלְיוֹנִים מִן הַזִּיזִין הַיּוֹצְאִין שָׁם שְׁנֵיהֶן אֲסוּרִין בּוֹ וְאֵין מִשְׁתַּמְּשִׁין בָּהֶן בַּכֵּלִים שֶׁבַּבָּתִּים אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן עֵרְבוּ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
When projections protrude from the walls [of the courtyard], all those that are below ten handbreadths high are considered to be extensions of the courtyard, and may be used by the inhabitants of the courtyard. All those that are within ten handbreadths of the upper storey may be used by the inhabitants of the upper storey.
The remainder, those that are located more than ten handbreadths above the ground and more than ten handbreadths below the upper storey, are forbidden to them both. Neither may use them for articles from the homes unless an *eruv* is established.


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:18
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:18)

בּוֹר שֶׁבֶּחָצֵר אִם הָיָה מָלֵא פֵּרוֹת טְבָלִים שֶׁאָסוּר לְטַלְטְלָן בְּשַׁבָּת וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן הֲרֵי הוּא וְחֻלְיָתוֹ כְּסֶלַע אוֹ תֵּל שֶׁבֶּחָצֵר. אִם הָיָה גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה וְהָיָה סָמוּךְ לַמִּרְפֶּסֶת הֲרֵי הוּא נֶחְשָׁב עִם הַמִּרְפֶּסֶת. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה מָלֵא מַיִם אֵין בְּנֵי חָצֵר וְלֹא בְּנֵי מִרְפֶּסֶת מַכְנִיסִין מִמֶּנּוּ לַבָּתִּים עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply to] a cistern located in [such] a courtyard: If it is filled with produce that was *tevel* - and hence is forbidden to be carried on the Sabbath - or with objects of a similar kind, it and the enclosure around it,³⁴ 15:9. are regarded like a rock or a mound in a courtyard.³⁵ If [the enclosure] is ten handbreadths high and close to the porch, it is considered to be an extension of the porch.
If, by contrast, it is filled with water,³⁶. neither the inhabitants of the courtyard nor the inhabitants of the porch may bring [water] to their homes from it unless they establish an *eruv*.

footnotes:
³⁴ See Hilchot Shabbat
³⁵ I.e., since the cistern is filled with objects that are forbidden to be carried, it is not given any special importance, and instead is considered like any other large, distinct object in the courtyard.
³⁶ It is, by nature, fit to be used by the inhabitants of both domains. Therefore, neither is entitled to do so, unless they establish an eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:19
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:19)

שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת זוֹ לִפְנִים מִזּוֹ וְאַנְשֵׁי הַפְּנִימִית יוֹצְאִין וְנִכְנָסִין וְעוֹבְרִין עַל הַחִיצוֹנָה. עֵרְבָה הַפְּנִימִית וְלֹא עֵרְבָה הַחִיצוֹנָה הַפְּנִימִית מֻתֶּרֶת וְהַחִיצוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה. עֵרְבָה הַחִיצוֹנָה וְלֹא עֵרְבָה הַפְּנִימִית שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת. הַפְּנִימִית מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא עֵרְבָה וְהַחִיצוֹנָה מִפְּנֵי אֵלּוּ שֶׁלֹּא עֵרְבוּ שֶׁעוֹבְרִין עֲלֵיהֶן. עֵרְבוּ זוֹ לְעַצְמָהּ וְזוֹ לְעַצְמָהּ זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ וְזוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ אֲבָל אֵין מְטַלְטְלִין מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] there are two courtyards, one lying behind the other, and the inhabitants of the inner courtyard enter and exit by passing through the outer courtyard: When [the inhabitants of] the inner courtyard have established an *eruv*, but [the inhabitants of] the outer courtyard have not, [the inhabitants of] the inner courtyard may carry [within their domain], but [the inhabitants of] the outer courtyard may not.³⁷
When [the inhabitants of] the outer courtyard have established an *eruv*, but [the inhabitants of] the inner courtyard have not, [the inhabitants of] both are forbidden to carry; [the inhabitants of] the inner courtyard because they did not establish an *eruv*, and the inhabitants of the outer courtyard because the people who pass through [their domain] did not establish an *eruv* [even within their own domain].³⁸ for themselves, they would not cause carrying to be forbidden in the outer courtyard, as reflected in the following clause.
If [the inhabitants of] both domains have established separate *eruvin*,³⁹). they may each carry within their own domain; they may not carry from one [domain] to the other.

footnotes:
³⁷ The rationale for these rulings is obvious; the concept is mentioned primarily to show the contrast with the subsequent clauses of the halachah. Unlike the inhabitants of the inner courtyard, who can reach their own dwelling only by passing through the outer courtyard, there is no reason for the inhabitants of the outer courtyard to pass through the inner one.
³⁸ This ruling reflects the principle stated in Halachah 23, that when people are forbidden to carry within their own domain, they cause carrying to be forbidden in the domain through which they pass. Had the inhabitants of the inner courtyard established an eruv
³⁹ Similarly, if the single courtyard belongs to a single individual, or the owners are considered to be members of a single household - e.g., a father and his children, their presence does not cause carrying to be forbidden in the outer courtyard (Maggid Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:20
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:20)

שָׁכַח אֶחָד מִן הַחִיצוֹנָה וְלֹא עֵרֵב הַפְּנִימִית בְּהֶתֵּרָהּ עוֹמֶדֶת. שָׁכַח אֶחָד מִן בְּנֵי הַפְּנִימִית וְלֹא עֵרֵב עִמָּהֶן אַף הַחִיצוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה מִפְּנֵי אֵלּוּ בְּנֵי הַפְּנִימִית שֶׁלֹּא עָלָה לָהֶן עֵרוּב שֶׁהֵן עוֹבְרִין עֲלֵיהֶן:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[If the inhabitants of both domains have established separate *eruvin*,] but one of the inhabitants of the outer courtyard forgot to join in the *eruv* [in his domain], the inhabitants of the inner courtyard are still permitted to carry.⁴⁰ is still intact and there is no necessity for the inhabitants of the outer courtyard to pass through the inner one.
When, by contrast, one of the inhabitants of the inner courtyard forgot to join in the *eruv* [in his domain], [not only are the inhabitants of the inner courtyard forbidden to carry, the inhabitants of] the outer courtyard are also forbidden to do so. [This restriction is instituted] because the inhabitants of the inner courtyard whose *eruv* is not acceptable pass through their [domain].

footnotes:
⁴⁰ For their eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:21
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:21)

עָשׂוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן עֵרוּב אֶחָד אִם הִנִּיחוּהוּ בַּחִיצוֹנָה וְשָׁכַח אֶחָד מֵהֶן וְלֹא עֵרֵב בֵּין שֶׁהָיָה מִבְּנֵי הַחִיצוֹנָה בֵּין מִבְּנֵי הַפְּנִימִית שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת עַד שֶׁיְּבַטֵּל לָהֶן שֶׁהֲרֵי בֵּאַרְנוּ שֶׁמְּבַטְּלִין מֵחָצֵר לֶחָצֵר. וְאִם הִנִּיחוּ עֵרוּבָן בַּפְּנִימִית וְשָׁכַח אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי הַחִיצוֹנָה וְלֹא עֵרֵב הַחִיצוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה וּפְנִימִית מֻתֶּרֶת בִּמְקוֹמָהּ. שָׁכַח אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי הַפְּנִימִית וְלֹא עֵרֵב שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת עַד שֶׁיְּבַטֵּל לָהֶן:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] both courtyards establish a single *eruv*: If the *eruv* is placed in the outer courtyard, and one of the inhabitants - whether an inhabitant of the outer courtyard or of the inner courtyard - forgets to join in the *eruv*, [all] the inhabitants of both courtyards are forbidden [to carry]⁴¹ is not acceptable for the inner courtyard, because it is not located within the courtyard itself, and it is not acceptable for the outer courtyard, because one of the inhabitants of the courtyard did not participate. unless he subordinates [the ownership of] his domain to them. [This is possible for, as we explained,⁴² one may subordinate the ownership of a domain in one courtyard to [people dwelling in] another.
[Different rules apply when] the *eruv* is placed in the inner courtyard: If one of the inhabitants of the outer courtyard did not join in the *eruv*, [the inhabitants of] the outer courtyard are forbidden to carry. [The inhabitants of] the inner courtyard, by contrast, are permitted to carry within their own [domain].⁴³. Although they had desired to join together with the inhabitants of the outer courtyard, the failure for this desire to be fulfilled does not cause them to forfeit their initial advantage as a domain joined by an *eruv*. (See *Eruvin* 75b.) If one of the inhabitants of the inner courtyard did not join in the *eruv*, [all the inhabitants of] both [courtyards] are forbidden [to carry]⁴⁴. This in turn causes carrying to be forbidden in the outer courtyard, as explained above. unless he subordinates [the ownership of] his domain to them.

footnotes:
⁴¹ The eruv
⁴² Chapter 2, Halachah 5.
⁴³ For all the inhabitants of this courtyard have joined together in a single eruv
⁴⁴ In this instance, the inhabitants of the inner courtyard are forbidden to carry because one of their number has failed to join in the eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:22
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:22)

הָיָה אֶחָד דָּר בֶּחָצֵר זוֹ וְאֶחָד דָּר בֶּחָצֵר זוֹ אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְעָרֵב אֶלָּא כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן מִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בְּכָל חֲצֵרוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים וּמַזָּלוֹת בַּפְּנִימִית אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא אֶחָד הֲרֵי הוּא כְּרַבִּים וְאוֹסֵר עַל הַחִיצוֹנָה עַד שֶׁיִּשְׂכְּרוּ מְקוֹמוֹ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
If [only] one person⁴⁵ 6:10), the Rambam explains that this can refer to members of an extended household - e.g., a father and his children. was dwelling in one [of these] courtyards and [only] one person was dwelling in the other, there is no need for them to establish an *eruv*;⁴⁶ is necessary. each one is permitted to carry in his courtyard.
If, however, a gentile dwells in the inner courtyard, even though he is merely a single [household], he is considered as many individuals, and [his presence] causes [the inhabitants of] the outer courtyard to be forbidden to carry until his domain is rented.⁴⁷ is required (*Eruvin* 75b). Although when one Jew lives in a courtyard together with a gentile, he is generally not required to rent his domain (Chapter 2, Halachah 9), an exception is made in this instance.
The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Orach Chayim* 382:17) mentions this as a singular opinion, and the *Mishnah Berurah* 382:59 states that it is not shared by most authorities. Some have noted that the Rambam himself uses a plural form of the word "rent," and they interpret this as referring to an instance where two Jews live in the outer courtyard.

footnotes:
⁴⁵ In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Eruvin
⁴⁶ Needless to say, to carry from one courtyard to the next, an eruv
⁴⁷ Our Sages explained that gentiles are less private about the details of their personal dwellings than the Jews. Thus many people will know of the gentile's presence and the fact that his domain was not rented, but they may not know that only one Jew lives in the outer courtyard. Therefore, they might not realize that this is an exception, and generally, when one courtyard leads to another, an eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:23
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:23)

שָׁלֹשׁ חֲצֵרוֹת הַפְּתוּחוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ וְרַבִּים בְּכָל חָצֵר מֵהֶן. עֵרְבוּ שְׁתַּיִם הַחִיצוֹנוֹת עִם הָאֶמְצָעִית הִיא מֻתֶּרֶת עִמָּהֶן וְהֵן מֻתָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ וּשְׁתַּיִם הַחִיצוֹנוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת זוֹ עִם זוֹ עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשׂוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּן עֵרוּב אֶחָד. הָיָה בְּכָל חָצֵר מֵהֶן אֶחָד אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁרַבִּים דּוֹרְסִין בַּחִיצוֹנָה אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְעָרֵב שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן מֻתָּר בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם בַּפְּנִימִית הוֹאִיל וְהֵן אֲסוּרִין בִּמְקוֹמָן עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ הֲרֵי הֵן אוֹסְרִין עַל הַיְחִידִים שֶׁבָּאֶמְצָעִית וְשֶׁבַּחִיצוֹנָה עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁבַּפְּנִימִית. זֶה הַכְּלָל רֶגֶל הָאֲסוּרָה בִּמְקוֹמָהּ אוֹסֶרֶת שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹמָהּ וְרֶגֶל הַמֻּתֶּרֶת בִּמְקוֹמָהּ אֵינָהּ אוֹסֶרֶת שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹמָהּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעוֹבֶרֶת עֲלֵיהֶן:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following laws apply when there are] three courtyards with entrances to each other, and there are many people dwelling in each courtyard: When [the inhabitants of] the two outer courtyards have established an *eruv* together with [the inhabitants of] the inner courtyard,⁴⁸, one with each of the outer courtyards. [the inhabitants of] the inner courtyard are permitted to carry within the outer courtyards, and [the inhabitants of] the outer courtyards are permitted to carry within the inner courtyard, but the inhabitants of the two outer courtyards may not carry in the other outer courtyard unless all three join in a single *eruv*.
If a single individual dwells in each courtyard, there is no need for them to establish an *eruv*, although many individuals pass through the outer courtyard.⁴⁹ explains that these two clauses refer to different situations. The first clause refers to a situation in which all three courtyards have entrances to the public domain, while this clause refers to a situation where only the outermost courtyard has an entrance to the public domain, and the inhabitants of this courtyard must pass through it.
Based on the *Hagahot Maimoniot*, *Merkevet HaMishneh* explains that the fundamental aspect of this ruling is the interpretation of Rabbi Shimeon's statements that the inhabitants of the middle courtyard are permitted to carry in either of the outer courtyards (*Eruvin* 45b, 48b). Although these statements were made regarding a situation in which only one courtyard opened up to the public domain, one can extrapolate that the same ruling would apply when all three open to the public domain. [The rationale is that] each of these individuals is permitted to carry in his own domain. If, however, there are two individuals living in the inner courtyard [different rules apply]. Since [these individuals] are forbidden to carry in their own domain until they establish an *eruv*, they cause the single individuals in the middle and in the outer domains to be forbidden [to carry] unless the two inhabitants of the inner domain establish an *eruv*.
This is the governing principle: When a person who is forbidden to carry in his own domain passes through another domain, his passage causes carrying to be forbidden there. When, by contrast, the person may carry in his own domain, his passage through another domain does not cause carrying to be forbidden there.

footnotes:
⁴⁸ I.e., the inhabitants of the inner courtyard have established two eruvin
⁴⁹ The Maggid Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:24
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:24)

שְׁתֵּי כְּצוֹצְטְרִיּוֹת זוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִזּוֹ שֶׁהֵן לְמַעְלָה מִן הַמַּיִם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעָשְׂתָה כָּל אַחַת מֵהֶן מְחִצָּה גְּבוֹהָה עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים יוֹרֶדֶת מִכָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. אִם הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי הַכְּצוֹצְטְרִיּוֹת בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרִין לְמַלְּאוֹת עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן עֵרוּב אֶחָד מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן כִּכְצוֹצְטְרָא אַחַת. וְאִם הָיָה בֵּין הָעֶלְיוֹנָה וְהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה יוֹתֵר עַל עֲשָׂרָה טְפָחִים וְעֵרְבָה זוֹ לְעַצְמָהּ וְזוֹ לְעַצְמָהּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן מֻתָּרוֹת לְמַלְּאוֹת:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] there are two balconies positioned over a body of water, and one is positioned above the other: Although [the inhabitants of] each of them have constructed a partition ten handbreadths high descending [to the water],⁵⁰ 15:15, which interprets this law as referring to a balcony with a hole in its floor, from which water is drawn and through which it is poured. The partition need not extend the full distance from the balcony to the water. As long as it extends either ten handbreadths below the balcony or ten handbreadths above the water, drawing water and pouring water through the hole in the balcony are permitted. if the two balconies are within ten handbreadths of each other,⁵¹ 8:8), the Rambam explains this as referring to two balconies positioned one on top of the other. Each balcony has a hole in it, and these holes are also aligned one on top of the other. it is forbidden for [their inhabitants] to draw water unless they establish a single *eruv*. [The rationale is that, because of their closeness] they are considered to be a single balcony.⁵² 88a, this ruling would appear to apply only when the two balconies are not directly above each other. The Ra'avad's position is shared by Rashi and the Rashba, while the Rambam's interpretation appears to be shared by Rabbenu Chanan'el. Although the *Maggid Mishneh* attempts to justify the Rambam's position, most authorities (including the *Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim* 355:5) follow the Ra'avad's view.
If the distance between the upper balcony and the lower balcony is more than ten handbreadths, and [the inhabitants of] each have established separate *eruvin*, they are both permitted to draw [water].

footnotes:
⁵⁰ See Hilchot Shabbat
⁵¹ In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Eruvin
⁵² The Ra'avad states that, based on Eruvin


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:25
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:25)

לֹא עָשְׂתָה הָעֶלְיוֹנָה מְחִצָּה וְעָשְׂתָה הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה אַף הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה לְמַלְּאוֹת מִפְּנֵי דְּלִי שֶׁל בְּנֵי הָעֶלְיוֹנָה שֶׁהֵן אֲסוּרִין שֶׁעוֹבֵר עָלֶיהָ. עָשְׂתָה הָעֶלְיוֹנָה מְחִצָּה וְלֹא עָשְׂתָה הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה הָעֶלְיוֹנָה מֻתֶּרֶת לְמַלְּאוֹת וְהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה. וְאִם נִשְׁתַּתְּפוּ בְּנֵי הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה עִם בְּנֵי הָעֶלְיוֹנָה בַּמְּחִצָּה שֶׁעָשׂוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת לְמַלְּאוֹת עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ עֵרוּב אֶחָד:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
If [the inhabitants of] the upper [balcony] did not make a partition, but the inhabitants of the lower [balcony] did, even [the inhabitants of] the lower balcony are forbidden to draw [water]. [The rationale is that] the buckets of the upper [balcony], which are forbidden, pass through their domain.⁵³ (*loc. cit.*), the source for this halachah, differently, and their interpretation is cited in the *Shulchan Aruch* (*loc. cit.*).
If [the inhabitants of] the upper [balcony] have made a partition, but [the inhabitants of] the lower [balcony] have not, [the inhabitants of] the upper balcony are permitted to draw water,⁵⁴ but [the inhabitants of] the lower balcony are forbidden.⁵⁵
If the inhabitants of the lower [balcony] joined together with [the inhabitants of] the upper [balcony] in the construction of the partition, [the inhabitants of] both are forbidden to draw water⁵⁶. until they establish a single *eruv*.

footnotes:
⁵³ I.e., the Rambam applies the principle stated in Halachah 23 - about people passing from one domain to another - to the buckets used to draw water that pass from domain to domain. In this instance, as well, the Ra'avad, Rashi, and others interpret Eruvin
⁵⁴ The fact that their buckets pass through the area of the lower domain is of no consequence.
⁵⁵ For they have no partition.
⁵⁶ Since they both have a share in the partition, they are considered as full partners in a single domain. Hence, it is necessary that they be joined together in an eruv


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:26
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:26)

שָׁלֹשׁ דִּיאֲטוֹת זוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִזּוֹ עֶלְיוֹנָה וְתַחְתּוֹנָה שֶׁל אֶחָד וְאֶמְצָעִית שֶׁל אֶחָד לֹא יְשַׁלְשֵׁל מִן הָעֶלְיוֹנָה לַתַּחְתּוֹנָה דֶּרֶךְ אֶמְצָעִית שֶׁאֵין מְשַׁלְשְׁלִין מֵרְשׁוּת לִרְשׁוּת דֶּרֶךְ רְשׁוּת אַחֵר. אֲבָל מְשַׁלְשֵׁל הוּא מִן הָעֶלְיוֹנָה לְהַתַּחְתּוֹנָה שֶׁלֹּא דֶּרֶךְ אֶמְצָעִית:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply to a building] with three storeys, one above the other; the upper and the lower storeys belong to one individual, and the middle storey belongs to another: One may not lower articles from the top storey to the bottom storey through the middle storey.⁵⁷ For we may not pass articles from one domain to another domain via a third domain. One may, however, lower articles from the top [storey] to the lower [storey] [if] they do not [pass] through the middle [storey].⁵⁸

footnotes:
⁵⁷ I.e., through a hole in the building.
⁵⁸ E.g, from a porch to a porch.


###### Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:27
[Mishneh Torah, Eruvin 4:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Eruvin/r/4:27)

שְׁתֵּי דִּיאֲטוֹת זוֹ כְּנֶגֶד זוֹ וְחָצֵר אַחַת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן שֶׁשּׁוֹפְכִין לְתוֹכָהּ הַמַּיִם לֹא יִשְׁפְּכוּ לְתוֹכָהּ עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן עֵרוּב אֶחָד. עָשׂוּ מִקְצָתָן עוּקָה בֶּחָצֵר לִשְׁפֹּךְ בָּהּ הַמַּיִם וּמִקְצָתָן לֹא עָשׂוּ. אֵלּוּ שֶׁעָשׂוּ שׁוֹפְכִים לָעוּקָה שֶׁלָּהֶן וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁלֹּא עָשׂוּ לֹא יִשְׁפְּכוּ לַחֲצֵר עַד שֶׁיְּעָרְבוּ. וְאִם עָשׂוּ אֵלּוּ עוּקָה וְאֵלּוּ עוּקָה כָּל אַחַת מִשְּׁתֵּיהֶן שׁוֹפֶכֶת לָעוּקָה שֶׁלָּהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא עֵרְבוּ:

**Sefaria Edition. Translated by R. Francis Nataf, 2019:**
[The following rules apply when] two buildings face each other and there is a courtyard below them into which water is poured.⁵⁹ 15:16-17, this refers to a courtyard larger than four cubits by four cubits. It is forbidden to pour water into a smaller courtyard unless one digs a pit, as reflected in the second clause of this halachah. They should not pour water into the courtyard unless they join together in a single *eruv*.
If [the inhabitants of one building]⁶⁰ 8:11). dig a pit in the courtyard into which to pour water, while [the inhabitants of the other building] do not, those who dig the pit may pour water into it. The others are forbidden to pour water into the courtyard unless they join together in a single *eruv*.
If [the inhabitants of both buildings] each dig a pit, each may pour water into the pit they have dug, even though they did not establish an *eruv*.

footnotes:
⁵⁹ As evident from Hilchot Shabbat
⁶⁰ The bracketed additions are based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Eruvin