Related for Eruvin 201:13

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ורבנן אמר רבי מאיר רשות הרבים ומהדרו אינהו כרמלית דאמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן ירושלים אלמלא דלתותיה ננעלות בלילה חייבין עליה משום רשות הרבים

how is it that when R'Meir spoke of a PUBLIC DOMAIN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The movement of objects between which add a private domain is Pentateuchally forbidden.');">⁴⁵</span> they retorted by citing a karmelith,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is subject to a Rabbinical restriction only.');">⁴⁶</span> since Rabbah B'Bar Hana<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec.. R. Huna (Asheri) .');">⁴⁷</span> stated in the name of R'Johanan: As for Jerusalem, were it not that its gates were closed at night, one would have incurred the guilt of carrying in it as a public domain?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the gates, however, were closed at night all the roads and streets of the city were only subject to the restrictions of a karmelith. Now since the preventive measure against the possibility of transferring the key from one domain into another was made by R. Meir only in the case of a public and a private domain (where a Pentateuchal law might be transgressed) , what objection does the Jerusalem incident (which relates to a private domain and a karmelith where only a rabbinical law might possibly be transgressed) provide against R. Meir?');">⁴⁸</span> R'Papa<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec. Rabbah.');">⁴⁹</span>

Explore related for Eruvin 201:13. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.