הדר. מי שאינו מודה בערוב – a Cuthean or a Sadducee.

הרי זה אוסר עליו – to carry from his house to the courtyard until he would rent permission from him that he has in his courtyard.

לעולם אינו אוסר עד שיהיו שני ישראלים – whether the first Tanna/teacher [of our Mishnah], whether Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov – the residence of an idolater is not called a residence, and by law, it should not prohibit, but the Rabbis decreed this in order that a Jew should not live with an idolater and that he should not learn from his actions. The first Tanna/teacher [of our Mishnah] holds that even though the idolater is suspected of being a murderer and it is prohibited for a Jew to be alone with him, sometimes it happens that a Jew resides with an idolater and the Rabbis state that an Eruv has no effect in the place of an idolater and the nullification of one’s domain has no effect in in the place of an idolater until he leases, for the idolater will not lease because he is suspected of witchcraft and because of this, a Jew will not come to dwell with an idolater and will not learn from his actions. But Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov holds that since the idolater is suspected of being a murderer, there are two [things] that are found present in residing that the Rabbis decreed concerning them: One – that it is not frequent a resident is forbidden to be alone with him, the Rabbis did not make a decree. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov and we rent from the idolater, even for less than a penny/Perutah, and even on Shabbat and even though the idolater does not resign his possession until a Jew will rent from him, he can resign his possession and even on Shabbat, for he would say to his fellow, that since my domain was not included in the Eruv, my possession is resigned to you (for Sabbath purposes – see Talmud Eruvin 69b), and he would be prohibited from carrying in the courtyard while his fellow (i.e., the idolater) is permitted, and if they wish after his fellow had completed carrying what he needed for himself, his fellow could go back and annul his possession and he would be permitted while his fellow would be prohibited.

מעשה בצדוקי – the Mishnah is deficient and it should be read as follows: A Sadducee is like an idolater. Rabban Gamaliel states that is he not like an idolater. “And it once happened with one Sadducee, etc. And Father said to us: Hurry up and fulfill all of your requirements before it (i.e., the eve of the Sabbath) departs and places restrictions upon you”; we learn from this that he is like a Jew/Israelite and is able to resign his possession and because he can resign his possession and go back and take it out, whether inadvertently or on purpose, he restricts us, as is mentioned further on. Because of this, Rabban Gamaliel states: “Hurry and perform your requirements before he removes his utensils to the courtyard and goes back and takes hold of his possessions that he cancelled and places restrictions upon you, but if he (i.e., the Sadducee) is like an idolater and an idolater is not able to resign his possessions until he rents it out, how is he able to prohibit you after he has rented it out and taken money?

ור"י אומר – Rabban Gamaliel did not say this, for Rabban Gamaliel holds that a Sadducee is always like an idolater. And this incident is not a proof for this is how Rabban Gamaliel spoke to them: “Hurry up and fulfill all of your requirements on the Eve of Shabbat before it gets dark, and not until he doesn’t remove his utensils as you have stated, but until the day hasn’t yet departed and it places restrictions upon you. And the legal decision is that any Jew who violates the Sabbath in public is like an idolater, and we don’t prepare an Eruv with him and he doesn’t resign possession (i.e., a legal fiction by which the carrying of objects on the Sabbath from one’s own place to one common to several persons, may be permitted) but we rent from him in the same manner that we rent from the idolater, and the person who observes the Sabbath in public, even though he might violate it in private and does not recognize the designation/concept of Eruv such as the Sadducees at this time, who observe the Sabbath but do not recognize the designation/concept of Eruv, we do not make an Eruv with him but he can resign possession and one doesn’t need to rent from him and he isn’t necessarily an idolater.

ביתו אסור להכניס ולהוציא – from his house to the courtyard whether he or the people of the courtyard. And like the case where he resigned possession of his courtyard (i.e., a legal fiction by which the carrying of objects on the Sabbath from one’s own place to one common to several persons, may be permitted), meaning to say the part that he shares with them in the courtyard, but he did not resign possession of his house for this Tanna/teacher holds what he resigns is resigned and what he did not resign, he did not resign, therefore, his house is his domain and the courtyard is their domain.

ושלהם – their homes it is permitted to remove from them to the courtyard, whether he or them for their homes and the courtyard are one domain and even though he did not make an Eruv, he is a guest regarding them for a guest can carry in the domain of his hospitality lodging.

נתנו לו – they [gave him] the domain of their courtyard, he is permitted to remove [something] from his house to the courtyard, for everything is like his domain, but they are prohibited even to carry from his house to the courtyard for they are not guests relating to him, for one in connection with many is considered a guest, but the many in connection with the individual are not considered guests.

היו שנים – [two] who did not make an Eruv and the rest of the members of the courtyard resigned possession to them, both of them are forbidden to each other because the courtyard belongs to both of them but the homes are specific – each home to its specific owner and one cannot take out from a domain that is specifically his to that domain which is (both) his and that of his fellow. But even though one of them retracted and resigned possession to his neighbor, it is of no effect, since at the time that the members of the courtyard resigned their possession to these two [individuals] who had not made an Eruv, they prohibit each other, it is found that the first resigning had no effect, and when he resigned possession once again, he was not able to acquire his own possession. Therefore, the members of a courtyard, someone of whom had made an Eruv and some of whom had not made an Eruv, those who had not made an Eruv had resigned their possession to those who had made an Eruv but those who had made an Eruv did not resign their possession to those who had not made an Eruv and they restrict each other, as it was stated, that a person who resigned his possession to the members of the courtyard must explicitly resign their ownership to each one individually.

ב"ש אומרים מבעוד יום – they hold that resigning possession causes the acquisition of possession and the acquisition of possession on the Sabbath is prohibited.

וב"ה אומרים אף משתחשך – they hold that resignation does not acquire possession but it removes it from possession and removal from possession on the Sabbath is all right. But in the Baraitha (Talmud Eruvin 70b), they explained that in every place where we say, that where it is prohibited for part of the Sabbath, it is prohibited for the entire Sabbath, except for one who resigns possession.

מי שנתן רשותו והוציא – for he came back and used the possession that he had resigned.

אחד שוגג ואחד מזיד – because the fine for an inadvertent act is because of a wanton act, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

שהוא שותף עם שכניו – that are in the alley for the purpose of an undefined partnership and not for the sake of an Eruv.

א"צ לערב – and it is that all of them will be partners in one utensil and specifically a combination of alleys that were [partners] in wine, as is taught in the Mishnah (Chapter 3, Mishnah 1): That they may prepare the Eruv and contribute to a partnership Eruv [with anything] (other than water or salt), but the Eruvim of courtyards, they don’t make an Eruv other than with bread, for it is an Eruv on account of dwelling and in the human dwelling the heart of a person is not drawn to anything other than to bread, and if he partnered in a combination of alleys with bread, all the more so that it is considered more and they rely upon that partnership of bread in the place of an Eruv but one does not need to make an Eruv of courtyards but if they partnered in wine or in other things, they must make an Eruv of courtyards and they don’t rely upon the partnership in order that the concept of Eruv should not be forgotten from the young children.

ר"ש אומר – but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

בטרקלין – a large and wide house, the seat of kings and they divided it to five [rooms] and all of them has an doorway from the reception room to the courtyard and they need to make an Eruv with the other members of the courtyard.

בית שמאי אומרים – their domains are divided and each group/party needs to place bread for the Eruv of the courtyard.

ב"ה אומרים – this partition does not [provide] the division of domains. But at the time when they divided the reception room into large partitions that reach the ceiling, no one disagrees that this is a division of domains because they are living in rooms or in attics But they do disagree when divided into low partitions that do not reach the ceiling, as the School of Shammai holds that a partition such as this divides the domain and the School of Hillel holds that there is no division of domains.

האחין השותפין – this is what he said: the brothers who ate at the table of their father and the partners who eat at one table. But eating at the table of their father is not exact, but rather, they take their food from the house of their father and each one of them eats in his own home. And similarly, the partners perform their labor with one house owner in a partnership and take their food from his house and take it to eat it in their own homes.

וישנים בבתיהם – and they and their father [and others] live in one courtyard.

צריכין ערוב לכל אחד ואחד – if they want to make an Eruv with the people of their courtyard.

מבטל את רשותו – he must resign his possession.

אימתי בזמן שמוליכין את ערובן – to place in the one of the homes of he other members of the courtyard for since they were in need of an Eruv and the rest of the tenants were forbidden, they also are forbidden, and all of them must place bread in the Eruv, since their tenants are divided up in sleeping courters, and also there is no actual food on the table of their father, but rather each person takes his provisions and eats in his [own] house.

אבל אם היה ערוב – all of the courtyard goes to the house of the father in order that they will not be in need for the Eruv, for the house where they place the Eruv, there is no need to place bread.

או שאין עמהן דיורין – other [tenants] who need them for an Eruv, there is no need for an Eruv since they are considered as individuals.

פתוחות זו לזו ופתוחות למבוי – In the Gemara (Talmud Eruvin 73b-74a), it is proven that it is not taught in our Mishnah that [the five courtyards] are open one to another, because we hold that an alley is not permitted with a stake or a crossbeam until all the homes and the courtyards are open into it, meaning to say, two houses open to all of the courtyard and two courtyards open into the alley, and these, since all of them are open to each other and combined together through their openings, they are considered as one and it (i.e., the Mishnah) doesn’t teach other than five courtyards opened to an alley.

ערבו החצרות – each one for itself.

מותרים בחצרות – all the members of the courtyard are permitted to themselves but are prohibited in the valley for they don’t rely on the Eruv in a joint area.

ואם נשתתפו – [if they partnered] also in the alley after they made an Eruv in the courtyards, they are permitted both here and there.

ושכח אחד מבני חצר ולא עירב – in his courtyard to permit his courtyard, but in the joint partnership, he had a part.

מותרין כאן וכאן – What is the reason that they don’t rely upon the partnership in the place of the Eruv? In order that they don’t forget the designation of Eruv from their childhoods and here, where most of the members of the courtyard made an Eruv, but that one of them forgot and did not make an Eruv (by placing some bread in the common ground) the designation of Eruv is not forgotten.

שהמבוי לחצרות כחצר לבתים – just as it is forbidden to remove [things] from the homes to courtyard without an Eruv, so too it is prohibited to remove [things] from the courtyard to the alley without partnership. But one should not say that they are not similar, for the house and the courtyard are the private domain and the other is the public domain, butt the courtyard and the alley are both domains of the many.

זו לפנים מזו – the inner [courtyard] is open to the outer [courtyard] and the outer to the public domain and there is crossing/treading of the [members of] the inner courtyard to on the outer [courtyard] to go out to the public domain.

עירבה פנימית – [made an Eruv in the inner courtyard] on its own to carry in its courtyard

שתיהן אסורות – for it would be that the inner [courtyard] on its own, a foot that is prohibited in its place, for behold it didn’t make an Eruv for itself and restricts in the walking by foot on to the external [courtyard].

זו מותרת לעצמה וכו' – for the foot that permits in its place does not restrict.

ר"ע אוסר – for he holds that the even the foot that is permitted restricts when he did not make an Eruv there.

וחכמים אומרים – for they hold that even a foot that is prohibited in its place such as the case where the inner [courtyard] did not make an Eruv for itself, it does not restrict on the outer [courtyard] but the Halakha is according to the first Tanna/teacher.

שכח אחד מן הפנימית כו' – it was the inside [courtyard] the foot is prohibited [from carrying] and restricts.

נתנו ערובן במקום אחד – both of them made Eruvin one with the other and placed the Eruv in the outer [courtyard] and called it one place because both of the courtyards use it as one and even one from the outer courtyard forgot and did not make an Eruv, both of them are forbidden [to carry in] for even the inner [courtyard] is also forbidden to carry in its courtyard for it cannot be removed from the outer [courtyard] to use it for itself for it lacks an Eruv over it for that same Eruv that permits [carrying] in the courtyard, they carried it to the outer [courtyard] but placed the Eruv in the inner [courtyard], the outer courtyard prohibits through the forgetfulness of the [people of the] inner [courtyard, but the inner [courtyard] but the inner [courtyard] does not prohibit through the forgetfulness of the [people of the] outer [courtyard] for they use one entrance.

ואם היו של יחידים – for the [people of] the inner [courtyard are not other than one, and the outer [courtyard] is only one, there is no need to make an Eruv each with the other because of foot traffic, for since it is of an individual in the inner [courtyard], it would be the foot that permits and does not restrict, and the anonymous Mishnah is according to the first Tanna/teacher of above that holds that the foot which permits does not restrict.