Reference for Eruvin 50:9

אמר ליה רב פפי משום דאתו ממולאי אמריתו מילי מולייאתא הנך מחיצות לגואי עבידן לבראי לא עבידן

the space of the walls does not increase it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence its permissibility. As the only reason for the prohibition is the increased area of the karpaf the prohibition cannot apply to a courtyard which was originally enclosed for dwelling purposes. The question of the ridges does not arise since in the absence of ridges also R. Simeon permits the movement of objects from the courtyard to the karpaf. And should it happen that the ridges were on the side of the karpaf the courtyard would still be permitted in agreement with R. Simeon (cf. supra n. 9) while the karpaf also would be permitted since the space previously occupied by the fallen walls cannot be regarded as an increase of its area on account of the ridges. Thus, at any rate, it follows that even according to R. Simeon the space previously occupied by the fallen walls is regarded as an addition to a karpaf.');">¹⁹</span> A certain orchard adjoined the wall of a mansion.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The orchard was bigger than two beth se'ah and enclosed by a wall that was put up after a door from the mansion was opened to it, so that it was enclosed for dwelling purposes.');">²⁰</span> When the outer wall of the mansion<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The wall that divided the mansion from the orchard and which had a door that communicated between the two.');">²¹</span>

Explore reference for Eruvin 50:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.