Commentary for Shabbat 261:3

אפשר דמצפרא ועד פלגא דיומא לגבי חד מפלגיה דיומא ולפניא לגבי חד סוף סוף בעידנא דאיתיה להאי ליתיה להאי אלא אמר רב אשי מי גרם לחצרות שיאסרו בתים וליכא

— It is possible that from morning until midday [they renounce their rights] in favour of one, and from midday until evening in favour of another.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus we have houses. ');">⁷</span> But even so, when there is one there is not the other? — Rather said R. Ashi: What makes the courtyards interdicted [in respect of the alley]? [Of course] the houses; and these are non-existent.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rab holds ('Er. 74a) that a roof, courtyards, enclosures, and the alley are all one domain, and carrying is permitted from one to another, provided, however, that the houses are not combined with the courtyards, so that no utensils belonging to the houses are to be found in the courtyards which might then be carried into the alley. Hence the same applies to carrying in the alley itself: for if there are no houses at all a formal partnership is unnecessary, and carrying in the alley is permitted, just as from the alley into the courtyard. Since the houses are not combined with the courtyards and no utensils may be moved from the former into the latter, for all practical purposes the houses are non-existent: therefore one may carry over the whole of the alley itself. ');">⁸</span> R. Hiyya b. Abba said in R. Johanan's name: Not in respect of everything did R. Eliezer rule that the preliminary preparations of a precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As distinct from the precept itself. ');">⁹</span>

Explore commentary for Shabbat 261:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.