Commentary page

Eruvin 45b

This page gathers the commentary on one source unit: the classic commentaries as they are printed, the sources the text cites, the sages named in it and direct links back to the text.

Read the full text in the reader

Babylonian Talmud · folio map

Eruvin 45b

Eruvin 45b. The full printed text of this folio side — 22 numbered segments, about 379 words — with the classic commentaries printed on the page.

Original text

Segment 1

וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יוֹצִיא זֶה מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁלּוֹ לְתוֹךְ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ.

provided that the one does not carry anything from his four-cubit limit into that of his fellow.

Segment 2

הָיוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה וְהָאֶמְצָעִי מוּבְלָע בֵּינֵיהֶן — הוּא מוּתָּר עִמָּהֶן, וְהֵן מוּתָּרִין עִמּוֹ, וּשְׁנַיִם הַחִיצוֹנִים אֲסוּרִין זֶה עִם זֶה.

With regard to a case where there were three people in this situation, and certain parts of the four cubits of the middle one were subsumed within the respective limits of each of the others, so that he shared a certain area with each of them, he is permitted to eat with either of them, and they are both permitted to eat with him; but the two outer ones are forbidden to eat with each other, since they share no common area.

Segment 3

אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: לְמָה הַדָּבָר דּוֹמֶה — לְשָׁלֹשׁ חֲצֵירוֹת הַפְּתוּחוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ, וּפְתוּחוֹת לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. עֵירְבוּ שְׁתַּיִם עִם הָאֶמְצָעִית — הִיא מוּתֶּרֶת עִמָּהֶן וְהֵם מוּתָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ, וּשְׁתַּיִם הַחִיצוֹנוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת זוֹ עִם זוֹ.

Rabbi Shimon said: To what is this comparable? It is like three courtyards that open into one another, and also open into a public domain. If the two outer courtyards established an eiruv with the middle one, the middle one is permitted to carry to the two outer ones, and they are permitted to carry to it, but the two outer courtyards are prohibited to carry from one to the other, as they did not establish an eiruv with one another.

Segment 4

גְּמָ׳ בָּעֵי רָבָא: מַאי קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי? מִסְבָּר קָא סָבַר: חֶפְצֵי הֶפְקֵר קוֹנִין שְׁבִיתָה.

GEMARA: Rava raised a dilemma: What does Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri hold? Does he hold that ownerless objects acquire residence for Shabbat, i.e., even an article that does not belong to anyone acquires residence at the onset of Shabbat and can therefore be carried two thousand cubits in each direction?

Segment 5

וּבְדִין הוּא דְּלִיפְלוֹג בְּכֵלִים. וְהָא דְּקָמִיפַּלְגִי בְּאָדָם — לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כּוֹחָן דְּרַבָּנַן, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיכָּא לְמֵימַר: הוֹאִיל וְנֵיעוֹר קָנָה, יָשֵׁן נָמֵי קָנָה, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּלָא.

And according to this understanding, Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri should by right have disagreed with the Rabbis even about utensils that were left in the field, i.e., that according to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, ownerless utensils can be moved two thousand cubits in each direction. And the reason that they disagreed about a person is to convey the far-reaching nature of the stringent ruling of the Rabbis, that although there is room to say: Since a person who is awake acquires for himself two thousand cubits, he also acquires them if he is sleeping, the mishna nonetheless teaches us that the Rabbis did not accept this argument, and this is why the dispute is taught specifically with respect to a person.

Segment 6

אוֹ דִילְמָא, קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי בְּעָלְמָא: חֶפְצֵי הֶפְקֵר אֵין קוֹנִין שְׁבִיתָה, וְהָכָא הַיְינוּ טַעְמָא: הוֹאִיל וְנֵיעוֹר קָנָה, יָשֵׁן נָמֵי קָנָה?

Or perhaps we should understand his position differently, that in general Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri holds that ownerless objects do not acquire residence of their own. But here, with regard to a person, the reason is as follows: Since a person who is awake acquires for himself two thousand cubits, he also acquires them if he is sleeping.

Segment 7

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, תָּא שְׁמַע: גְּשָׁמִים שֶׁיָּרְדוּ מֵעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב — יֵשׁ לָהֶן אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה לְכׇל רוּחַ. בְּיוֹם טוֹב — הֲרֵי הֵן כְּרַגְלֵי כׇּל אָדָם.

Rav Yosef said: Come and hear a solution to this dilemma from the following baraita : Rain that fell on the eve of a Festival has two thousand cubits in each direction, meaning that one is permitted to carry the rainwater within a radius of two thousand cubits. But if the rain fell on the Festival itself, it is like the feet of all people, as it did not acquire residence, and consequently one is permitted to carry this water wherever he is permitted to walk.

Segment 8

אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי: ״חֶפְצֵי הֶפְקֵר קוֹנִין שְׁבִיתָה״, הָא מַנִּי — רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הִיא.

Granted, it is understandable if you say that Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri holds that ownerless objects acquire residence; in accordance with whose opinion is this baraita ? It is that of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, and consequently the rain that fell on the eve of the Festival acquired residence in the spot where it fell.

Segment 9

אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ: ״חֶפְצֵי הֶפְקֵר אֵין קוֹנִין שְׁבִיתָה״, הָא מַנִּי? לָא רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְלֹא רַבָּנַן!

However, if you say that he maintains that ownerless objects do not acquire residence, in accordance with whose opinion is this baraita ? Neither that of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, nor that of the Rabbis, as it clearly indicates that rain acquires a place of residence even though it has no owner. Rather, we must say that Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri is of the opinion that ownerless objects acquire residence, and this baraita is in accordance with his opinion.

Segment 10

יְתֵיב אַבָּיֵי וְקָאָמַר לַהּ לְהָא שְׁמַעְתָּא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב סָפְרָא לְאַבָּיֵי: וְדִילְמָא בִּגְשָׁמִים הַסְּמוּכִין לָעִיר עָסְקִינַן, וְאַנְשֵׁי אוֹתָהּ הָעִיר דַּעְתָּם עִילַּיְיהוּ!

Abaye sat and recited this tradition. Rav Safra said to Abaye: Perhaps we are dealing with rain that fell near a city, and the inhabitants of that city had it in mind, and that is why it acquires two thousand cubits in each direction.

Segment 11

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ, דִּתְנַן: בּוֹר שֶׁל יָחִיד — כְּרַגְלֵי יָחִיד, וְשֶׁל אוֹתָהּ הָעִיר — כְּרַגְלֵי אוֹתָהּ הָעִיר, וְשֶׁל עוֹלֵי בָּבֶל — כְּרַגְלֵי הַמְמַלֵּא.

Abaye said to him: It should not enter your mind that such an understanding is correct, as we learned in a mishna: A cistern that belongs to an individual, its water is like the feet of that individual, the owner of the cistern, in that it may be carried wherever he is permitted to walk. And a cistern that belongs to a particular city, its water is like the feet of the people of that city, in that it may be carried wherever the inhabitants of that city may walk, i.e., two thousand cubits in each direction from the city. And a cistern that belongs to pilgrims from Babylonia on the way to Eretz Yisrael, meaning that it belongs to all Jews and has no particular owner, its water is like the feet of the one who draws the water, in that it may be carried wherever he is permitted to walk.

Segment 12

וְתַנְיָא: בּוֹר שֶׁל שְׁבָטִים — יֵשׁ לָהֶן אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה לְכׇל רוּחַ. קַשְׁיָין אַהֲדָדֵי!

And it was taught in a baraita : A cistern that belongs to one of the tribes and has no particular owner, its water has two thousand cubits in each direction. If so, these two sources contradict each other, as the mishna teaches that water that belongs to the entire community does not establish residence, whereas the tanna of the baraita holds that it may be carried two thousand cubits from its place.

Segment 13

אֶלָּא לָאו, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: הָא — רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, הָא — רַבָּנַן.

Rather, in order to resolve the contradiction, learn from here: This source, which states that the water may be carried two thousand cubits, was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, who says that even ownerless objects acquire residence; that source, which states that water that does not belong to any particular person is like the feet of the one who draws it, was taught in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who say that ownerless objects do not acquire residence.

Segment 14

כִּי אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָכִי קָאָמַר רַב סָפְרָא, וְהָכִי אַהְדַּרִי לֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְאַמַּאי לָא תֵּימָא לֵיהּ מִגּוּפַהּ? אִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ גְּשָׁמִים הַסְּמוּכִין לָעִיר עָסְקִינַן — הַאי ״יֵשׁ לָהֶן אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה לְכׇל רוּחַ״?!

The Gemara relates that when Abaye came before Rav Yosef, he said to him: This is what Rav Safra said, and this is what I answered him. Rav Yosef said to him: And why did you not answer him from the baraita itself? If it should enter your mind that we are dealing with rain that fell near a city, how can you understand the statement that the rainwater has two thousand cubits in each direction?

Segment 15

הָא ״כְּרַגְלֵי אַנְשֵׁי אוֹתָהּ הָעִיר״ מִיבַּעְיָא לֵיהּ!

According to your understanding, that the rainwater may be carried two thousand cubits because the inhabitants of the town had it in mind, the baraita should have said: The rainwater is like the feet of the inhabitants of that city. Rather, you must say that the inhabitants of the city did not acquire the water and that it may be carried within a radius of two thousand cubits, because the baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, that ownerless objects acquire residence.

Segment 16

אָמַר מָר: בְּיוֹם טוֹב — הֲרֵי הֵן כְּרַגְלֵי כׇּל אָדָם. וְאַמַּאי? לִיקְנֵי שְׁבִיתָה בְּאוֹקְיָינוֹס.

The Gemara further examines the baraita cited earlier. The Master said: If rain fell on the Festival itself, it is like the feet of all people. The Gemara raises a difficulty: And why should this be? The water should have acquired residence in the ocean [ okeyanos ], where it was when the Festival began. And since the water went out on the Festival beyond its limit after it evaporated and formed into clouds, moving the water more than four cubits should be prohibited.

Segment 17

לֵימָא דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דְּאִי כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר — הָא אָמַר: כָּל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ מִמֵּי אוֹקְיָינוֹס הוּא שׁוֹתֶה!

Let us say that this baraita was taught not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. Because if it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, he said: The entire world drinks from the waters of the ocean; that is to say, evaporated ocean water is the source of rain.

Segment 18

אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: הָכָא בְּעָבִים שֶׁנִּתְקַשְּׁרוּ מֵעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב עָסְקִינַן.

Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Here we are dealing with clouds that were already formed on the eve of the Festival. Since these clouds were already formed before the Festival, the water did not acquire residence in the ocean or travel beyond its limit on the Festival.

Segment 19

וְדִילְמָא הָנָךְ אָזְלִי, וְהָנָךְ אַחֲרִינֵי נִינְהוּ? דְּאִית לְהוּ סִימָנָא בְּגַוַּיְיהוּ.

The Gemara asks: But perhaps those clouds that had already been formed on the eve of the Festival went away, and these clouds, from which the rain fell, are others that did acquire residence in the ocean? The Gemara answers: We are dealing here with a case where there is an identifying sign that these are the same clouds and not others.

Segment 20

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָוֵי סָפֵק דְּדִבְרֵיהֶם, וְסָפֵק דְּדִבְרֵיהֶם לְהָקֵל.

And if you wish, say that there is another reason we are not concerned that these might be other clouds: This matter of whether or not they are the same clouds pertains to an uncertainty with respect to a rabbinic law, and the principle is that with regard to an uncertainty concerning a rabbinic law, one may follow the lenient understanding.

Segment 21

וְלִיקְנִי שְׁבִיתָה בְּעָבִים! תִּיפְשׁוֹט מִינַּהּ, דְּאֵין תְּחוּמִין לְמַעְלָה מֵעֲשָׂרָה. דְּאִי יֵשׁ תְּחוּמִין לִיקְנֵי שְׁבִיתָה בְּעָבִים!

The Gemara asks: Let the water acquire residence in the clouds, where it was when the Festival began, and its limit should be measured from there. Since the baraita taught that the water is like the feet of all people, if so, resolve from here another dilemma, and say that there is no prohibition of Shabbat limits above ten handbreadths, and one is permitted to travel more than two thousand cubits above this height. For if there is a prohibition of Shabbat limits above ten handbreadths, let the water acquire residence in the clouds.

Segment 22

לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לָךְ: יֵשׁ תְּחוּמִין, וּמַיָּא בְּעֵיבָא מִיבְלָע בְּלִיעִי.

The Gemara rejects this argument: Actually, I can say to you: There is a prohibition of Shabbat limits even above ten handbreadths, and the water does not acquire residence in the clouds because it is absorbed in the clouds. Since water does not exist in its usual state within the clouds, but rather takes on a different form, it does not acquire residence there.

Eruvin 45b

Eruvin 45b

Rashi

Tosafot

Rabbeinu Chananel

Rashba

Ritva

Meiri

Maharsha (Chidushei Halachot)

Maharam

Gilyon HaShas

What this page contains

Continue the sequence

Parallel sources

Lessons and study tools

Sages named on this page

Original text