Shabbat 13

Chapter 13

א כגון דאית לה מחיצות וכי הא דאמר עולא א"ר יוחנן קרפף יותר מבית סאתים שלא הוקף לדירה ואפילו כור ואפילו כוריים הזורק לתוכו חייב מ"ט מחיצה היא אלא שמחוסרת דיורין

1 E.g., when it has barriers,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' i.e., it is enclosed by a fence, wall, etc. Though the Rabbis treat it as a karmelith in so far that carrying therein is forbidden, it is nevertheless private ground by Biblical law, and carrying between it and public ground involves liability. It is in that sense that the Mishnah designates it a private domain. ');">1 and [this is] in accordance with the following dictum of 'Ulla in R. Johanan's name: An enclosure more than two se'ahs [in area]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Se'ah is primarily a measure of capacity; by transference it is used as a surface measure on the basis that two se'ahs' seed require an area of five thousand square cubits. ');">2 which is not enclosed in attachment to a dwelling place,3

ב בשלמא רב אשי לא אמר כדעולא אלא עולא מ"ט לא אמר כשמעתיה אמר לך אי דאית לה מחיצות בקעה קרי לה קרפף היא ורב אשי רה"י קתני:

2 even if it is a kor or two kor [in area],4 if one throws [an article] therein [from public ground] he is liable. What is the reason? It is a partitioned area, but it lacks inhabitants.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An enclosed place is private ground by Biblical law, whatever its size. Now, if it is attached to a dwelling (or enclosed for living purposes), e.g., a house stood in a field and then the field, upon which one of the doors of the house opens, was enclosed, it remains private ground by Rabbinical law too. But if it is not connected with a house, it is private ground only up to the area of two se'ahs; beyond that one may not carry therein by Rabbinical law. Since, however, it is private ground by Biblical law, if one throws an article into it from public ground he is liable, and to this the Mishnah quoted refers when it states that a plain is private ground. ');">5 Now, as for R. Ashi, it is well that he does not explain it as 'Ulla;6

ג והכרמלית אטו כולהו נמי לאו כרמלית נינהו כי אתא רב דימי א"ר יוחנן לא נצרכה אלא לקרן זוית הסמוכה לרה"ר דאע"ג דזימנין דדחקי ביה רבים ועיילי לגוה כיון דלא ניחא תשמישתיה כי כרמלית דמי

3 but why does 'Ulla not explain it in accordance with his own dictum? — He answers you: if it has barriers, is it called a plain: [surely] it is an enclosure! And R. Ashi?7 — 'Private ground' is taught.8 'And a karmelith.' Are then all these [sea, plain and colonnade] too not karmelith? — When R. Dimi came,9

ד כי אתא רב דימי א"ר יוחנן בין העמודין נידון ככרמלית מ"ט אף על גב דדרסי בה רבים כיון דלא מסתגי להו בהדיא ככרמלית דמיא אמר ר' זירא אמר רב יהודה איצטבא שלפני העמודים נידון ככרמלית

4 he said in the name of R. Johanan: This is necessary only in respect of a corner near a street:10 though the masses sometimes press and overflow therein,11 yet since it is inconvenient for [general] use, it ranks as a karmelith.

ה למ"ד בין העמודים כ"ש איצטבא למ"ד איצטבא איצטבא הוא דלא ניחא תשמישתיה אבל בין העמודים דניחא תשמישתיה לא לישנא אחרינא אבל בין העמודין דזימנין דדרסי ליה רבים כרה"ר דמיא

5 When R. Dimi came, he said in R. Johanan's name: [The place] between the pillars12 is treated as a karmelith. What is the reason? Though the general public walk through there, since they cannot proceed with ease,13 it is as a karmelith. R. Zera said in Rab Judah's name: The balcony in front of the pillars is treated as a karmelith. Now, he who stated thus of [the ground] between the pillars, — how much more so the balcony!14

ו אמר רבה בר שילא אמר רב חסדא לבינה זקופה ברה"ר וזרק וטח בפניה חייב על גבה פטור

6 But he who mentions the balcony-only the balcony [ranks as a karmelith], because it is inconvenient for [general] use, but not [the ground] between the pillars, which is convenient for [general] use.15 Another version: but [the place] between the pillars, through which the public occasionally walk, is as public ground. Rabbah b. Shila said in R. Hisda's name: If a brick is standing upright in the street, and one throws [an article]16

ז אביי ורבא דאמרי תרוייהו והוא שגבוה שלשה דלא דרסי לה רבים אבל היזמי והיגי אע"ג דלא גביהי שלשה וחייא בר רב אמר אפילו היזמי והיגי אבל צואה לא ורב אשי אמר אפילו צואה

7 and it adheres to its side, he is liable; on top, he is not liable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When an article lies in the street and is less than ten handbreadths high and four square it is a place of non-liability; but that is only in respect of what can be put to a well-defined, natural use; e.g., the top of a low wall or of a brick, upon which articles may be placed. But the side of a wall or a brick can only give accidental service, as in the example, and in that case everything less than ten handbreadths high is as the street itself, and so when one throws an article and after traversing four cubits it cleaves to the side of the brick, it is as though it fell in the street, and he is liable. But the top, which, as explained by Abaye and Raba, is three handbreadths high, constitutes a separate domain — a place of non-liability. ');">17 Abaye and Raba both state: Providing that it is three handbreadths high, so that the public do not step on it;18 but thorns and shrubs, even if not three [handbreadths] high.19

ח אמר רבה דבי רב שילא כי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי יוחנן אין כרמלית פחותה מארבעה ואמר רב ששת ותופסת עד עשרה מאי ותופסת עד עשרה אילימא דאי איכא מחיצה עשרה הוא דהוי כרמלית ואי לא לא הוי כרמלית ולא והאמר רב גידל אמר רב חייא בר יוסף אמר רב בית שאין בתוכו עשרה וקרויו משלימו לעשרה על גגו מותר לטלטל בכולו בתוכו אין מטלטלין בו אלא ד' אמות

8 Hiyya b. Rab maintained: Even thorns and shrubs, but not dung.20 R. Ashi ruled: Even dung. Rabbah, of the school of R. Shila, said: When R. Dimi came,21

ט אלא מאי ותופסת עד י' דעד י' הוא דהויא כרמלית למעלה מי' טפחים לא הוי כרמלית וכי הא דא"ל שמואל לרב יהודה שיננא לא תיהוי במילי דשבתא למעלה מי' למאי הלכתא אילימא דאין רשות היחיד למעלה מי' והאמר רב חסדא נעץ קנה ברשות היחיד וזרק ונח על גביו אפילו גבוה מאה אמה חייב מפני שרה"י עולה עד לרקיע

9 he said in the name of R. Johanan: No karmelith can be less than four [handbreadths square].22 And R. Shesheth said: And it extends23 up to ten. What is meant by, 'and it extends up to ten?' Shall we say that only if there is a partition ten [handbreadths high] is it a karmelith, not otherwise;24 but is it not? Surely R. Gidal said in the name of R. Hiyya b. Joseph in Rab's name: In the case of a house, the inside of which is not ten [hand breadths in height] but its covering makes it up to ten, it is permitted to carry on the roof over the whole [area];25 but within, one may carry only four cubits!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it is unfit for a dwelling, its walls are disregarded and it ranks not as a private domain but as a karmelith (R. Han.). This is the reverse of our hypothesis. ');">26 But what is meant by 'and it extends up to ten?' That only up to ten is it a karmelith, but not higher.27 And even as Samuel said to Rab Judah, Keen scholar!28 In matters concerning the Sabbath do not consider29 aught above ten. In what respect? Shall we say, that there is no private ground above ten? Surely R. Hisda said: If one fixes a rod in private ground30 and throws [an article from the street] and it alights on the top, even if it is a hundred cubits high, he is liable, because private ground extends up to heaven!

Previous Chapter Next Chapter