Eruvin 199:1

משום דהוי דירה שתשמישה לאויר וכל דירה שתשמישה לאויר אין מטלטלין בה יתר מבית סאתים:

- Because it is a dwelling-place that serves only the outside air,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The watchmen use it only during the season when they are engaged in their duties in the fields and vineyards in the open air. No one uses the area tinder a tree as an ordinary habitation.');">¹</span> and no movement of objects is permitted in a dwelling-place whose only function is that of serving the outside air, if its area was greater than two beth se'ah. IF ITS ROOTS ARE HIGH ABOVE THE GROUND etc. It was stated: If the roots of a tree descended from a level that was above three handbreadths into one that was lower than three handbreadths,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. they began to bend downwards after they had grown to a high above three handbreadths from the ground.');">²</span> Rabbah ruled: It is permitted to use them, while R'Shesheth ruled: It is forbidden to use them.'

שרשיו גבוהין מן הארץ וכו': איתמר שרשי אילן הבאין מלמעלה משלשה לתוך שלשה רבה אמר מותר להשתמש בהן רב ששת אמר אסור להשתמש בהן

Rabbah ruled: It is permitted to use them', since all levels lower than three handbreadths from the ground are regarded as the ground itself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As one may use the ground so may one use the roots within the three handbreadths level.');">³</span> R'Shesheth ruled: It is forbidden to use them', because, owing to the fact that they derive from a forbidden source,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Those parts of the roots that were higher than three handbreadths.');">⁴</span> they themselves are also forbidden. If they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The roots.');">⁵</span>

רבה אמר מותר להשתמש בהן דכל פחות מג' דארעא ארעא היא רב ששת אמר אסור להשתמש בהן דכיון דמכח איסור קאתי אסורין

are in the shape of a rocky crag.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Meshunitha is derived by Rashi from the came root as shen in shen sela', sc. the roots grew upwards and then bent downwards in the shape of a sloping hill, smaller roots branching out of the bigger ones.');">⁶</span> those that grow upwards<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From a section of a root that was higher than three handbreadths from the ground.');">⁷</span> are forbidden,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even according to the view of Rabbah, since hot11 roots and source are in a forbidden level.');">⁸</span> those that grow downwards<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From a root section below the level of three handbreadths.');">⁹</span>

דדמו כמשוניתא דסלקין לעילא אסורין דנחתין לתתאי שרו לצדדין פלוגתא דרבה ורב ששת

are permitted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even by R. Shesheth, since roots as well as source are below three handbreadths from the ground.');">¹⁰</span> while as to those that grow sideways<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. they branch out from a root section that was above the three handbreadths level and bend downwards within that level.');">¹¹</span> a difference of opinion exists between Rabbah and R'Shesheth;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to the former, their use is permitted since they are bent downwards and reached the low level which is regarded as the ground itself; while according to the latter they are forbidden on account of their source which is within the forbidden level.');">¹²</span> and the same<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Divergence of view.');">¹³</span>

וכן אניגרא וכן בקרן זוית

applies to a dike<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'ditch', in which grew a tree, two of whose sides were embedded in the sides of the dike. According to Rabbah the use of the roots that were within three handbreadths from the top of the dike is permitted while according to R. Shesheth, since they grew from a level which is above three handbreadths from the bottom of the dike, they are forbidden.');">¹⁴</span> and a corner.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Formed by two walls that enclosed the three sides of a tree whose height reached to within three handbreadths above the walls. According to Rabbah the portion of the tree above the walls may be used since its lower section on those sides is covered by the walls and the part projecting above them is within three handbreadths from their tops. According to R. Shesheth, however, since their source in the exposed side of the tree is above three handbreadths from the ground, this is forbidden. In the case of a tree one of whose sides only adjoins a wall while its other sides remained exposed even Rabbah, it may be added, agrees that its use is forbidden.');">¹⁵</span> Abaye had<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Within a house.');">¹⁶</span> a certain palm-tree that projected through the sky-light<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not above three handbreadths from the roof.');">¹⁷</span>

ההוא דיקלא דהוה לאביי והוה סליק באיפומא אתא לקמיה דרב יוסף ושרא ליה

and when he came to R'Joseph<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To enquire whether its use was permissible on the Sabbath.');">¹⁸</span> the latter permitted it to him ,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because none of the sides of the tree protected above three handbreadths from the roof of the house.');">¹⁹</span> R'Aha B'Tahlifa observed: In permitting its use to you he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Joseph.');">²⁰</span> acted in accordance with Rabbah's view.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the source is disregarded. According to R. Shesheth, since the use of the lower section of the tree within the house, which is obviously higher than three handbreadths from the floor, is forbidden, the use of the section above the roof which grows from It is equally forbidden.');">²¹</span>

אמר רב אחא בר תחליפא דשרא לך כרבה שרא לך

Is not this obvious? - It might have been presumed that even according to the view of R'Shesheth a house<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the case of a window (supra 76b) .');">²²</span> is regarded as full<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. as if it were full of earth up to the ceiling.');">²³</span> and that one may, therefore, use a tree within less than three handbreadths from the roof, hence we were informed [that the decision was given only in accordance with the view of Rabbah]. We learned: IF ITS ROOTS ARE THREE HANDBREADTHS HIGH ABOVE THE GROUND ONE MAY NOT SIT ON THEM.

פשיטא מהו דתימא אפילו לרב ששת ביתא כמאן דמלי דמי ולישתמש בפחות מג' סמוך לגג קמ"ל

Now how are we to imagine the circumstances? If they did not<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After rising to the height of three handbreadths.');">²⁴</span> subsequently bend downwards,is not this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' THAT ONE MAY NOT SIT ON THEM.');">²⁵</span> obvious?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of course it is. Why then was it stated?');">²⁶</span>

תנן שרשיו גבוהין מן הארץ ג' טפחים לא ישב עליהם היכי דמי אי דלא הדרי כיפי פשיטא אלא לאו אע"ג דהדרי כיפי

This must consequently be a case, must it not, where they subsequently bent downwards?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And yet it is forbidden to sit on them. All objection against Rabbah.');">²⁷</span> - No, the fact is that they did not subsequently bend downwards, but<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As to your objection. ' Is not this obvious?'');">²⁸</span> it is this tha we were informed: Even though [on] one of its<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The tree's.');">²⁹</span> sides [they were] level with the ground.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rabbah maintains his view only where more than one side was on a level with, or within three handbreadths front the ground.');">³⁰</span>

לא לעולם דלא הדרי כיפי והא קמ"ל אע"ג דצידו אחד שוה לארץ:

Our Rabbis taught: If the roots of a tree were three handbreadths high above the ground, or if there was a hollow space of three handbreadths beneath them, one must not sit on them even though on one side of the tree they were level with the ground, because it is not permissible<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath.');">³¹</span> either to climb upon a tree or to suspend oneself from a tree or to recline on a tree; nor may one climb upon a tree while it is yet day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Sabbath eve.');">³²</span> to remain there all the Sabbath day, the law being the same in the case of a tree and in that of any cattle. In the case of a cistern, a ditch, a cave or a wall one may climb up or climb down even if they were a hundred cubits [deep or high].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The prohibition to climb up or down a tree on the Sabbath is not title to the trouble or effort involved in the process but to a preventive measure against the possibility of intentional plucking of a growing plant, which is one of the acts of work forbidden on the Sabbath.');">³³</span>

ת"ר שרשי אילן שגבוהין מן הארץ ג' טפחים או שיש חלל תחתיהן ג' טפחים אע"פ שצידו אחד שוה לארץ ה"ז לא ישב עליהן לפי שאין עולין באילן ואין נתלין באילן ואין נשענין באילן

One Baraitha teaches: If a man climbed, up<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Upon a tree.');">³⁴</span> he may climb down. But does not another Baraitha teach that he is forbidden to climb down? - This is no difficulty since the former refers to one who climbed up<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here'.');">³⁵</span> while it was yet day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Sabbath eve.');">³²</span>

ולא יעלה באילן מבעוד יום וישב שם כל היום כולו אחד אילן ואחד כל הבהמה אבל בור שיח ומערה וגדר מטפס ועולה מטפס ויורד ואפילו הן מאה אמה

while the latter refers to one who did it after dusk.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the former case, since his ascent involved no transgression, no penalty was imposed upon him.');">³⁶</span> If you prefer I might reply: Both refer to all ascent after dusk and yet there is no difficulty, since the one refers to an unwitting act while th other refers to an intentional one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. prev. n. mut. mut.');">³⁷</span> If you prefer I might say: Both refer to an unwitting act, but the principl underlying their divergence of view is the question whether a penalty has been imposed in respect of an unwitting act as a precaution against the performance of an intentional act. One Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The author of the latter Baraitha.');">³⁸</span>

תני חדא אם עלה מותר לירד ותני חדא אסור לירד לא קשיא כאן מבעוד יום כאן משחשיכה

is of the opinion that such a penalty has been imposed while the other Master holds that no such penalty has been imposed. R'Huna son of R'Joshua observed: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The divergence of opinion between the authors of the Baraithas just discussed.');">³⁹</span> is similar in principle to the dispute between the following Tannas: If the blood of sacrifices of which one sprinkling only is necessary<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the altar. Lit., 'those that are given by one giving'.');">⁴⁰</span> was confused with the blood of other sacrifices of which one sprinkling is necessary,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a bowl of blood of a firstling, for instance, was confused with that of the tithe of cattle. (The interpretation here follows Bertinoro in Zeb. VIII, 10) .');">⁴¹</span>

ואיבעית אימא הא והא משחשיכה ול"ק כאן בשוגג כאן במזיד

each<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Bertinoro l.c.');">⁴²</span> is to be sprinkled once. If blood of which four sprinklings are necessary was confused with other blood of which four sprinklings were necessary<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As, for instance, the blood of a burnt-offering with that of a peace-offering (cf. prev. n.) .');">⁴³</span> each<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Bertinoro l.c.');">⁴²</span>

ואיבעית אימא הא והא בשוגג והכא בקנסו שוגג אטו מזיד קמיפלגי מר סבר קנסינן ומר סבר לא קנסינן

is to be sprinkled four times. If that which has to be sprinkled four times was confused with that which has to be sprinkled once, R'Eliezer ruled: Each<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Bertinoro l.c.');">⁴²</span> must be sprinkled four times,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The superfluous sprinklings in the case of the latter being regarded as those of mere water that can in no way affect the prescribed number.');">⁴⁴</span> and R'Joshua ruled: Each<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Bertinoro l.c.');">⁴²</span>

אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע כתנאי הניתנין במתנה אחת שנתערבו בניתנין מתנה אחת ינתנו במתנה אחת מתן ד' במתן ד' ינתנו במתן ד'

must be sprinkled only once.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Any additional sprinklings would, in the case of the latter, constitute an infringement of the Pentateuchal prohibition against adding to the precepts (cf. Deut. XIII, 1) .');">⁴⁵</span> 'Does he not', said R'Eliezer to him, 'thereby<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By sprinkling, in the case of the former, less than the prescribed number of times. Lit., 'behold he'.');">⁴⁶</span> transgress the law against diminishing from the precepts? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Deut. XIII, 1.');">⁴⁷</span> 'Does he not thereby',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By his sprinkling, in the case of the latter, more times than required.');">⁴⁸</span>

מתן ארבע במתן אחת ר"א אומר ינתנו במתן ד' ור' יהושע אומר ינתנו במתנה אחת

replied R'Joshua.' transgress the prohibition against adding to the precepts? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Supra n. 8.');">⁴⁹</span> 'This',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The prohibition to add to the precepts.');">⁵⁰</span> R'Eliezer retorted: 'applies only<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the only said'.');">⁵¹</span>

אמר לו ר"א הרי הוא עובר על בל תגרע אמר לו ר' יהושע הרי הוא עובר בבל תוסיף

where it is in all isolated condition'. is 'The prohibition against diminishing from the precepts also' , said R'Joshua to him, 'applies only when it is in all isolated condition'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'in itself', but not where it is confused with another kind.');">⁵²</span> R'Joshua, furthermore, explained: If you sprinkle<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' More than the prescribed number of times.');">⁵³</span> you transgress the prohibition against adding to the precepts and you also perform the act with your own hand, but if you do not sprinkle you transgress indeed the prohibition against diminishing from the precepts but you do not perform any act with your own hand'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 80a.');">⁵⁴</span>

א"ר אליעזר לא אמרו אלא כשהוא בעצמו אמר לו ר' יהושע לא נאמר בל תגרע אלא כשהוא בעצמו

Now, according to R'Eliezer who laid down there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 80a.');">⁵⁴</span> that the performance of an uncertain precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'arise and do'.');">⁵⁵</span> is preferable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To its neglect.');">⁵⁶</span> the man may here also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where he was on the Sabbath on a tree.');">⁵⁷</span>

ועוד א"ר יהושע כשנתת עברת על בל תוסיף ועשית מעשה בידך כשלא נתת עברת על בל תגרע ולא עשית מעשה בידך

climb down,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By doing this he escapes the prohibition against his continued use of the tree.');">⁵⁸</span> while according to R'Joshua who held there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 80a.');">⁵⁴</span> that the abstention from the performance of an uncertain precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'sit and do not act'.');">⁵⁹</span> is preferable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To its performance.');">⁶⁰</span>

לר"א דאמר התם קום עשה עדיף ה"נ ירד לר' יהושע דאמר התם שב ואל תעשה עדיף ה"נ לא ירד

the man here also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where he was on the Sabbath on a tree.');">⁵⁷</span> may not climb down.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since by remaining on the tree he performs no new act.');">⁶¹</span> This argument, however, might be fallacious,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'perhaps it is not (so) '.');">⁶²</span> since R'Eliezer may have maintained his view, that the performance of an uncertain precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'arise and do'.');">⁵⁵</span>

דילמא לא היא ע"כ לא קאמר ר"א התם קום עשה עדיף אלא דקא עביד מצוה אבל הכא דלא עביד מצוה ה"נ לא ירד

is preferable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To its neglect.');">⁵⁶</span> only there where a positive precept is thereby<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the sprinkling.');">⁶³</span> performed. but here,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where he was on the Sabbath on a tree.');">⁵⁷</span>

ואי נמי ע"כ לא קאמר ר' יהושע התם שב ואל תעשה עדיף אלא

where<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By climbing down.');">⁶⁴</span> no positive precept is performed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One only avoids thereby the continued infringement of a negative precept against the use of a tree on the Sabbath.');">⁶⁵</span> he may also agree that the man must not climb down. Or else: R'Joshua may have maintained his view, that the abstention from the performance of an uncertain precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'sit and do not act'.');">⁵⁹</span> is preferable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To its performance.');">⁶⁰</span> only there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where he was on the Sabbath on a tree.');">⁵⁷</span>