Reference for Eruvin 136:12

אמר רב אחא בר תחליפא משמיה דרבא לא דכ"ע אין מבטלין וחוזרין ומבטלין והכא בקנסו שוגג אטו מזיד קא מיפלגי מ"ס קנסו שוגג אטו מזיד ומר סבר לא קנסו שוגג אטו מזיד

but if unwittingly he does not.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' infra 69b.');">³⁵</span> Now, do they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Meir and R. Judah.');">³⁶</span> not differ on the following principles: One Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Meir who ruled that restrictions are imposed even where an object had been carried out unwittingly, from which it follows that the renunciation is not regarded as the tenant's complete elimination.');">³⁷</span> holding that renunciation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since elimination is incomplete (cf. prev. n.) and the tenant in question is still denied to be living in the same courtyard.');">³⁸</span>

Explore reference for Eruvin 136:12. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.