Eruvin 137

והתנן מי שנתן רשותו והוציא בין בשוגג בין במזיד אוסר דברי רבי מאיר

But have we not learnt: If a tenant<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who, owing to forgetfulness, failed to contribute his share to the 'erub of his neighbours.');">¹</span> presented his share<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To his neighbours, on the Sabbath.');">²</span> and then he carried out something,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Into their alley.');">³</span> whether he acted unwittingly or intentionally, he imposes restrictions;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the use of the alley by all its residents.');">⁴</span> so R'Meir?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra 69b. How then are the two rulings of R. Meir (v. supra n. 2) to be reconciled?');">⁵</span>

אמר רב יוסף אימא אינו אוסר אביי אמר לא קשיא כאן שהחזיקו בני מבוי במבוי כאן שלא החזיקו בני מבוי במבוי

- R'Joseph replied. Read:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Mishnah just cited.');">⁶</span> He imposes no restrictions. Abaye replied: There is no contradiction,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra n. 7.');">⁷</span> the former dealing with a case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' lit., 'here'.');">⁸</span>

והתניא עד שלא נתן רשותו הוציא בין בשוגג בין במזיד יכול לבטל דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר בשוגג יכול לבטל במזיד אינו יכול לבטל

where the residents of the alley had taken possession of the alley<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the man who presented them with, or renounced in their favour his share had carried out his objects.');">⁹</span> while the latter deals with one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' lit., 'here'.');">⁸</span> where the residents of the alley had not taken possession of the alley; and so it was also taught: If he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A tenant who, forgetting to join in the common 'erub, presented his share to his neighbours.');">¹⁰</span> carried out an object<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Into the alley towards which his courtyard as well as the courtyards of the others opened.');">¹¹</span> before he had renounced his share,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the alley, in favour of his neighbours.');">¹²</span>

מי שנתן רשותו והוציא בין בשוגג בין במזיד אוסר דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר במזיד אוסר בשוגג אינו אוסר במה דברים אמורים בשלא החזיקו בני מבוי במבוי אבל החזיקו בני מבוי במבוי בין בשוגג ובין במזיד אינו אוסר:

whether he acted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he carried out the objects.');">¹³</span> unwittingly or intentionally, he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though accused of a desecration of the Sabbath.');">¹⁴</span> is entitled to renounce his right;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In favour of the other residents.');">¹⁵</span> so R'Meir. R'Judah ruled: If he acted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he carried out the objects.');">¹³</span>

אמר מר ר' יהודה אומר בלשון אחרת מהרו ועשו צורכיכם במבוי עד שלא תחשך ויאסר עליכם אלמא נכרי הוא והא אנן עד שלא יוציא תנן

unwittingly he is entitled to renounce his right<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In favour of the other residents.');">¹⁵</span> but if he acted with intention he is no longer entitled to renounce his right.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. prev. n., R. Judah holding the opinion that a person who intentionally desecrates the sabbath is denied the privilege of renunciation.');">¹⁶</span> He who presented his share<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the alley, in favour of his neighbours.');">¹²</span> and then carried out an object.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Into the alley towards which his courtyard as well as the courtyards of the others opened.');">¹¹</span> whether he acted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he carried out the objects.');">¹³</span>

אימא עד שלא יוציא היום ואיבעית אימא לא קשיא כאן במומר לחלל שבתות בצנעא כאן במומר לחלל שבתות בפרהסיא

unwittingly or with intention, he imposes restrictions;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the use of the alley by its residents. His intentional use of it after he had presented his share to his neighbours is regarded as the re-acquisition of his share; and in the case of an unwitting use of it the restrictions are imposed on account of the possibility of intentional use.');">¹⁷</span> so R'Meir. R'Judah ruled: If he acted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he carried out the objects.');">¹⁸</span> with intention he imposes restrictions but if unwittingly he does not. This,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That if an Israelite tenant presented his share to his neighbours and then used the alley, there is a difference of opinion between R. Meir and R. Judah, the latter holding that restrictions are imposed only where the use was intentional while the former maintains that they are imposed vnc even where the use was unintentional (cf. Rashi s.v. ad fin. a.l.) .');">¹⁹</span>

כמאן אזלא הא דתניא מומר וגילוי פנים הרי זה אינו מבטל רשות גילוי פנים מומר הוי

however, applies only where the residents of the alley did not take possession of the alley.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the tenant in question had carried out his object.');">²⁰</span> but where they did take possession of it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the tenant in question had carried out his object.');">²⁰</span> he imposes no restrictions upon them irrespective of whether he acted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he carried out the objects.');">¹⁸</span> unwittingly or intentionally. The Master said: R'Judah related, [The instruction was given] in a different form: "Hasten and attend to your requirements in the alley before nightfall when he would impose restrictions in you".'

אלא מומר בגילוי פנים אינו יכול לבטל רשות כמאן כר' יהודה

From this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The statement of R. Judah according to which a Sadducee is not entitled to renounce his right to his share.');">²¹</span> it is evident that he is regarded as a gentile; but have we not learnt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In R. Judah's ruling in our MISHNAH:');">²²</span> BEFORE HE CARRIES OUT?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which shows that until that time at least his renunciation is valid. If, however, he has the status of a gentile how could his renunciation ever be valid? ouhv tmh tmuh');">²³</span> - Read: Before the conclusion of the day.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' (cf. Bah. Cur. edd.) , an expression which conveys the same meaning as that of 'before nightfall' in R. Judah's statement cited thmuh tmh uhkf thmuh tmh in the Baraitha. Instead of (Hif. of) which bears the meaning of 'carrying' ( 'he will carry out his things') , the reading is tmh');">²⁴</span> And if you prefer I might say: There is really no contradiction since the former<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here' our Mishnah which allows a Sadducee to renounce his right.');">²⁵</span>

ההוא דנפק בחומרתא דמדושא כיון דחזייה לר' יהודה נשיאה כסייה אמר כגון זה מבטל רשות לר' יהודה

might refer to one who is a mumar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'changed', 'converted', an apostate, a person who does not conform to the Jewish law.');">²⁶</span> in respect of desecrating the Sabbath in privacy only, while the latter<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Baraitha which regards the Sadducee as a gentile.');">²⁷</span> might deal with one who desecrates the Sabbath in public. Whose view is followed in what was taught: 'A mumar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'changed', 'converted', an apostate, a person who does not conform to the Jewish law.');">²⁶</span> or a barefaced sinner is not entitled to renounce his share'? - But is a barefaced sinner on a par with a mumar?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Barefacedness, surely, is not so great an offence as the denial of the laws of the Sabbath.');">²⁸</span>

אמר רב הונא איזהו ישראל מומר זה המחלל שבתות בפרהסיא א"ל רב נחמן כמאן אי כר"מ דאמר חשוד לדבר א' חשוד לכל התורה כולה אפי' בא' מכל איסורין שבתורה נמי

- Rather read: 'A barefaced mumar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. one who desecrates the Sabbath in public.');">²⁹</span> is not entitled to renounce his share'. Now in agreement with whose [view has this been laid down]? - In agreement, of course, with that of R'Judah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As has just been explained. It cannot be in agreement with the views of R. Meir since he allows even a mumar who desecrates the Sabbath in public to renounce his share. -');">³⁰</span> A certain man once went out<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath when the carrying of objects in a public domain is forbidden.');">³¹</span> with a jewelled charm<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Humarta di-medusha, a 'charm', 'ball' or 'bead' containing a 'jewel for sealing'; or 'a small bundle of spices' (cf. Rashi a.l. anti Jast.) . Such an object, not being regarded as a personal ornament, may not be carried on the Sabbath in a public domain even on one's person.');">³²</span>

אי כרבנן האמרי חשוד לדבר א' לא הוי חשוד לכל התורה כולה

but when he observed R'Judah Nesi'ah he covered it up.' A person of this type',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., who is ashamed to carry the forbidden object in the presence of a noted personality.');">³³</span> [the Master said.] 'is in accordance with the view of R'Judah entitled to renounce his share'. R'Huna stated: Who is regarded as an Israelite in mumar?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is now assumed to mean a mumar or apostate in all respects.');">³⁴</span> He who desecrates the Sabbath in public. Said R'Nahman to him: In agreement with whose view?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Is this statement made.');">³⁵</span> If [it be suggested that it is] in agreement with that of R'Meir who holds that a person who is suspected of disregarding one matter [of law] is held suspect in regard to all the Torah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Bek. 30b.');">³⁶</span> the statement should also apply to any of the other prohibitions of the Torah;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Not only to that against the desecration of the Sabbath.');">³⁷</span> and if [it is suggested that it is] in agreement with the view of the Rabbis,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who differ from R. Meir (v. Bek. 30b) .');">³⁸</span> did they not rule, it may be objected, that one who is suspected of disregarding one law is not held suspected in regard to all the Torah