Thursday, December 15, 2005

Rif Eruvin 22b {Eruvin 72b continues ... 73a}


{Eruvin 72b continues}
"The brothers who eat...":
We thus derive that the place of sleep causes {as opposed to the place of eating}.
Rav Yehuda cited Rav: The case under discussion was where they took the food {from their father, but didn't actually eat it there}. {And thus there is no proof.}

The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: One who has in his friend's courtyard a gate-house, an exedra {from Latin ex-, ex- + hedra, seat; = An often semicircular portico with seats that was used in ancient Greece and Rome as a place for discussions}, or a balcony, imposes no restrictions upon him {=the neighbor}. A straw-magazine, a cattle pen, a room for wood, or a storehouse does impose restrictions upon him {=the neighbor}. Rabbi Yehuda says: Only a dwelling-house imposes restrictions. Rabbi Yehuda said: It once happened that ben Napcha had five courtyards at Usha, and when the matter was submitted to the Sages, they ruled that only a dwelling-house imposes restrictions.

A dwelling-house, do you really think? Rather, say: a dwelling place {mekom bet dira - our gemara: bet dira}.

{Eruvin 73a}
{A mekom dira:} Rav said: One's dining place.
And Shmuel said: One's sleeping place.

And the halacha is like Rav.

And we deduce {from the fact that they need to discuss the definition of mekom dira} that the halacha is like Rabbi Yehuda.

Abaye inquired of Rabba: If five residents {of the same courtyard} collected their contributions to the eruv, when they carry it to another place {=they want to join with the residents of a different courtyard}, does one eruv contribution suffice for them all, or does each need to contribute his own contribution to the eruv?

He {Rabba} said to him: One eruv contribution {suffices} for all of them.

But the brothers are as if they previously collected {an eruv among themselves} yet the Mishna states that they need an eruv contribution from each and every one! Here {in the Mishna}, we are dealing with a case where there are others {=other tenants} witrh them - since these {tenants in the same courtyard} impose restrictions on them, those {in the other courtyard they desire to join} also impose restrictions upon them.
This {reading} is also logical - for at the end of the Mishna, it states "When? When they carry their eruv to another place; but if the eruv came to them, or there are no dwellers with them in the courtyard {to impose restrictions upon them}, they do not need to make an eruv."
We so derive.

Rav Chiyya bar Avin inquired of Rav Sheshet: These students who eat bread {=have their meals} in the country and then come and spend their nights in the schoolhouse {in town, and the distance between their place of eating and of sleeping is less than 2000 cubits}, when we measure for them {their techum}, do we measure from where they ate, or perhaps from the schoolhouse?
He {=Rav Sheshet} said to him: We measure from the schoolhouse, for we are witnesses that if someone would bring him food here {to the schoolhouse} he would have preferred it.

Rami bar Chama inquired of Rav Chisda: The father and his son, or the teacher and his student, are they regarded as many or as one individual? Need they make an eruv or not? Their alleyway, can it be premitted via a lechi or korah {like alleyways with two courtyards in it} or not?
He {Rav Chisda} said to him: You have learnt it {in a brayta}: The father and his son, or the teacher and his student, when there are not {other} residents with them, are considered as one individual, and they need not construct an eruv, and {yet} their alleyway is permitted via a or a lechikorah.

Five courtyards opening into one another and opening into the alleyway, if they made an eruv in the courtyards,

No comments: