Eruvin 12

מי שהיו לו שני בתים משני צידי רה"ר עושה לחי מכאן ולחי מכאן או קורה מכאן וקורה מכאן ונושא ונותן באמצע אמרו לו אין מערבין רשות הרבים בכך

If a man had two houses on the two sides [respectively] of a public domain he may<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the area in question is already bordered by the two walls provided by the two opposite houses.');">¹</span> construct one side-post [on any of the houses] on one side and another on its other side or one cross-beam on the one side [of any of the houses] and another on its other side and then he may move things about<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in a private domain.');">²</span> in the space between them;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., , 'in the middle'.');">³</span>

וכי תימא בכך הוא דלא מיערבא הא בדלתות מיערבא והאמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן ירושלים אילמלא דלתותיה ננעלות בלילה חייבין עליה משום רשות הרבים

but they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Rabbis.');">⁴</span> said to him: A public domain cannot be provided with an 'erub in such a manner'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then is this ruling of the Rabbis to be reconciled with the statement, 'How is a road etc.', (supra 6a ad fin.) ?');">⁵</span> And should you reply that it cannot be provided with an 'erub 'in such a manner',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The one prescribed in the Baraitha just cited.');">⁶</span>

ואמר עולא הני אבולי דמחוזא אילמלא דלתותיהן ננעלות חייבין עליהן משום רה"ר

but that it may be provided with one by means of doors, surely, [it can be retorted,] did not Rabbah B'Bar Hana<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec., 'R. Huna' (Asheri) .');">⁷</span> state in the name of R'Johanan that Jerusalem,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Its public road stretched from one end of the town to the other and it had all the other characteristics of a public domain (cf. supra note 1) .');">⁸</span> were 'it not that its gates were closed at night,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that it assumed the nature of a 'courtyard'.');">⁹</span>

אמר רב יהודה הכי קאמר כיצד מערבין מבואות המפולשין לרשות הרבים עושה צורת הפתח מכאן ולחי וקורה מכאן

would have been subject to the restrictions<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'guilty concerning it'.');">¹⁰</span> of a public domain; and 'Ulla too has stated that the city gateways of Mahuza,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A Jewish trading center. One of the 'neighbouring towns' or 'dependencies' of Babylon.');">¹¹</span> were it not for the fact tha their doors were closed at night, would have been subject to the restriction of a public domain?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 32, nn. 14f. How then could this be reconciled with the ruling of Beth Hillel that no closing if doors is necessary?');">¹²</span>

איתמר רב אמר הילכתא כתנא קמא ושמואל אמר הלכה כחנניה

- Rab Judah replied: It is this that was meant: How is an 'erub to be provided for alleys that open out at both ends into a public domain? The shape of a doorway is made at one end and a side-post and<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec. 'or' (Alfasi and Asheri) . vfkv t,fkv');">¹³</span> cross-beam, at the other.

איבעיא להו לחנניה אליבא דבית הלל צריך לנעול או אין צריך לנעול ת"ש דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל אינו צריך לנעול וכן א"ר מתנה אמר שמואל אינו צריך לנעול איכא דאמרי אמר רב מתנה בדידי הוה עובדא ואמר לי שמואל אין צריך לנעול

It was stated: Rab said: The halachah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So MS.M. Cur. edd. .');">¹⁴</span> is in agreement with the first Tanna,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 6a ad fin.');">¹⁵</span> and Samuel said: The halachah is in agreement with Hanania.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Asheri adds: 'In accordance (with the ruling) of Beth Hillel' (v. supra 6a ad fin.) .');">¹⁶</span>

בעו מיניה מרב ענן צריך לנעול או אין צריך לנעול אמר להו תא חזי הני אבולי דנהרדעא דטימן עד פלגייהו בעפרא ועייל ונפיק מר שמואל ולא אמר להו ולא מידי

The question was raised: According to Hanania's ruling in the name of Beth Hillel , is it necessary to lock [the single door of the alley] or not? - Come and hear what Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: It is not necessary to lock it; and so also said R'Mattenah in the name of Samuel: It is not necessary to lock it. Some there are who read: R'Mattenah stated: 'I myself was once concerned in such a case and Samuel told me that there was no need to lock [the door]'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the alley. Its Sabbatic ritual fitness is not affected even if the door always remains open.');">¹⁷</span> R''Anan was asked: Is it necessary to lock [the door of an alley] or not?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. previous note.');">¹⁸</span>

אמר רב כהנא הנך מגופות הואי

He replied: Come and see the [alley] gateways of Nehardea<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Nehardea was a town on the Euphrates, situated at its junction with the Royal Canal about seventy miles north of Sura, and famous for its great academy in the days of Samuel, which was rivalled only by that of Sura. Nehardea also had the characteristics of a public domain (v. supra p. 32, n. 14) .');">¹⁹</span> which are half buried in the ground<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'hidden unto their half in earth', and cannot possibly be moved from their open positions.');">²⁰</span> and Mar Samuel continually passes through<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and goes in and goes out'. I.e., and saw that the gates were not closing, whilst the people were relying on them as providing an 'erub.');">²¹</span>

כי אתא רב נחמן אמר פניוה לעפרייהו לימא קסבר רב נחמן צריך לנעול לא כיון דראויות לנעול אע"פ שאין ננעלות

[these gates] and yet never raised any objection.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and he did not tell them anything'.');">²²</span> R'Kahana said: Those were [partially] closed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Anan's example, therefore, proves nothing.');">²³</span> When R'Nahman came<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To Nehardea.');">²⁴</span>

ההוא מבוי עקום דהוה בנהרדעא רמי עליה חומריה דרב וחומריה דשמואל ואצרכוהו דלתות חומריה דרב דאמר תורתו כמפולש והאמר רב הלכה כת"ק

he ordered the earth to be removed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he said: Remove their earth', the accumulated debris which prevented the closing of the gates.');">²⁵</span> Does this then imply that R'Nahman is of the opinion that [alley doors] must be locked?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Contrary to the general opinion expressed supra?');">²⁶</span> - No; provided they are capable of being closed [Sabbatic ritual fitness is effected] even though they are not actually closed.

כשמואל דאמר הלכה כחנניה והאמר שמואל תורתו כסתום כרב דאמר תורתו כמפולש

There was a certain crooked alley at Nehardea upon which were imposed the restriction of Rab and the restriction of Samuel, and doors were ordered<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and they made it require'.');">²⁷</span> [to be fixed at its bends].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In addition to the side-posts or cross-beams fixed at the ends of the arms adjoining the public domain.');">²⁸</span> 'The restriction of Rab' who ruled that [a crooked alley] 'is subject to the same law as one that is open on both sides'; but [as] Rab in fac stated: 'The halachah is in agreement with the first Tanna'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who required no door at all, but only a sort of frame in the shape of a doorway.');">²⁹</span>

ומי עבדינן כתרי חומרי והא תניא לעולם הלכה כבית הלל והרוצה לעשות כדברי בית שמאי עושה כדברי בית הלל עושה מקולי ב"ש ומקולי ב"ה רשע מחומרי ב"ש ומחומרי ב"ה עליו הכתוב אומר (קהלת ב, יד) הכסיל בחשך הולך אלא אי כב"ש כקוליהון וכחומריהון אי כב"ה כקוליהון וכחומריהון

[the second restriction was applied] in agreement with Samuel who stated: 'The halachah is in agreement with Hanania'. And [as] Samuel in fact ruled [that a crooked alley] 'is subject to the law of a closed one'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which required no contrivance.');">³⁰</span> [the first restriction was applied] in agreement with Rab who ruled that '[a crooked alley] is subject to the same law as one that is open at both ends'.

הא גופא קשיא אמרת לעולם הלכה כב"ה והדר אמרת הרוצה לעשות כדברי ב"ש עושה

Do we, however, adopt the restrictions of two<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'do we do like two restrictions'.');">³¹</span> [authorities who differ from one another]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., where one relaxes the law and the other restricts it and vice versa.');">³²</span> Was it not in fact taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. Suk. II, 'Ed. II, R.H. 14b.');">³³</span>

ל"ק כאן קודם בת קול כאן לאחר ב"ק

The halachah is always in agreement with Beth Hillel, but he who wishes to act in agreement with the ruling of Beth Shammai may do so, and he who wishes to act according to the view of Beth Hillel may do so; [he, however, who adopts] the more lenient rulings of Beth Shammai and the more lenient rulings of Beth Hillel is a wicked man, [while of the man who adopts] the restrictions of Beth Shammai and the restrictions of Beth Hillel Scripture said: But the fool walketh in darkness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Eccl. II, 14.');">³⁴</span> A man should rather act<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but'.');">³⁵</span> either in agreement with Beth Shammai both in their lenient and their restrictive rulings or in agreement with Beth Hillel in both their lenient and their restrictive rulings?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why then were the restrictions of both Rab and Samuel imposed on the crooked alley of Nehardea?');">³⁶</span>

ואיבעית אימא הא והא לאחר בת קול

<br>(Now is not this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Baraitha just cited.');">³⁷</span> self-contradictory? You said: 'The halachah is always in agreement with Beth Hillel, and then you [proceed to] say: 'But he who wishes to act in agreement with the ruling of Beth Shammai may do so'! - This is no difficulty; the latter statement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here'.');">³⁸</span> [was made] before [the issue of] the bath kol<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. and cf. infra 13b. The bath kol announced that the halachah was always in agreement with Beth Hillel.');">³⁹</span> while the former<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here'.');">³⁸</span> [was made] after [the issue of] the bath kol.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. and cf. infra 13b. The bath kol announced that the halachah was always in agreement with Beth Hillel.');">³⁹</span> And if you prefer I might reply: Both the former and the latter statements<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that and that'.');">⁴⁰</span> [were made] after [the issue of] the bath kol