Note to Eruvin 18 - Reincarnation of Manoach

"A man should not walk after a woman, and not even after his wife."

Regarding this, the Sages said that Manoach was an ignoramus since he "Followed his wife" when an angel invited them. However, Manoach could claim that he followed "The advice of his wife." 

To settle this, Manoach came back in reincarnation as Abba Chilkiya. People used to come to Abba Chilkiya to ask him to pray for rain. He and his wife would go to the roof of their house and pray, but the clouds would first appear on her side - just as the angel first came to the wife of Manoach. So Abba Chilkiya was proving that as Manoach, he followed "The advice of his wife." She also had an additional trait: when some ruffians appeared in their neighborhood and caused big trouble, Abba Chilkiya prayed that they die, whereas she prayed that they would reform - which they did.

Incidentally, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein would always let a woman in the door first.

Source:  "Gilgulei Neshamot" by Rabbi Menachem Meir of Fano.

Art: John Phillip (1817–1867) A Woman Praying

Eruvin 94 – Broken wall

If one of the walls of a courtyard completely collapsed, then this courtyard becomes a public area, and one who carries an object on Shabbat from a house to the courtyard has violated Shabbat and needs to bring an offering for his mistake – that is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. The Sages, however, say that the courtyard is not really public – people still do not walk there freely, but rather it is a “karmelit,” meaning an area through which passers-by go only occasionally. How could they disagree to this extent? The truth is that they don’t argue about the complete courtyard, but only about the area where the wall stood. Rabbi Eliezer says that people now do walk there, and the Sages – that they did not do walk there before and don’t really walk there even now.

If a courtyard was broken through on two sides, one can still carry there, but only this Shabbat, and not the next – these are the words of Rabbi Yehudah, but the Sages say that it should be consistent on every Shabbat. What is the situation? If the breach is less than ten steps – it is a door, and even two doors do not make the courtyard lose its private status. And if the breaches are wider than ten steps, then even one of them makes the courtyard open, and we do not need the case of two!? Rav explained that here we are dealing with a breach in the corner of the courtyard, and people don’t normally walk through such breaches. This is why even with two broken walls the courtyard can still retain its private status.

Art: The doorstep encounter by Eugene de Blaas 1843-1932

Eruvin 93 – One-directional partition

Previously we learned that when two roofs or two courtyards, a large one and a small one, are adjoining, they are not equal: the small one is subordinate to the large one. The residents of the large one can carry in a small one, but not the other way around.

To emphasize this, Rabbah gave examples. If nine people are in the large courtyard and one is on the small one – they add up for prayer, but if nine are in the small courtyard and one is in the large one, he does not add up. If one planted grapevines in the large courtyard, then it is forbidden to plant wheat in the small one because one cannot plant the two together, and the small courtyard is considered to be part of the large one; however, if one planted grapevines in the small courtyard, then it is permitted to plant wheat in the large one because they are separate.

Abaye found the last rule very hard to understand: in fact, the separation between the two courtyards, in the form of an entrance, made planting forbidden! Had there not been a separation, it would have been enough to distance the plantings by four steps.

The Sages showed Abaye many cases where some form of separation actually created additional prohibitions, but Abaye dismissed them all by explaining that in each case they were not the same, and thus Abaye remained with his surprise at the Rabbah’s ruling.

Art: Still Life With Grapevine by Jean-Baptiste Robie 1821 - 1910

Eruvin 92 – Two roofs, a large and a small one

If there are two adjoining roofs over two houses, a large one and a small one, then it is permitted to carry on a large one, but it is forbidden to carry on a small one on Shabbat. Why? We need to explain both parts of this rule.

The roofs are not surrounded by walls, or partitions, they are just flat roofs on top of the houses, so how could any roof be considered a private area where it is permitted to carry? We see here a new principle, “extend the wall:” the walls of the houses that go down can be extended up and serve as imaginary partitions surrounding the roof. We understand now why it can be permitted to carry on the large roof.

Furthermore, the small roof is considered simply an opening, a door for the large one, which does not upset its status as a private area. However, the small roof is completely open to the large one. It is not just an opening or a door, it takes away one of the small roof’s wall partitions. The small roof is then like a courtyard with a missing wall, open into the street, and one cannot carry in such a courtyard, and consequently on this small roof, as we have seen at the very beginning of Eruvin.

Art: Roofs at Szentendre 1930s by George Loftus Noyes

Eruvin 91 – All the roofs indeed?

Earlier, we saw the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who said that all roofs and all courtyards are considered as one area and do not need an eruv. Any object that was in a courtyard at the start of Shabbat on Friday night can be freely carried to another courtyard. Since this opinion will become the law, the Talmud investigates it further.

Rav says that this leniency applies only if they have not made an eruv. However, if they did, this leniency is not needed: at the very least, people can take things from their houses into their own courtyard, and this is enough.

However, Shmuel could not understand his reason: if all roofs are one area, what does it matter if the people made an eruv (common food) or not? Rav Chisda explained that either position has its problems. If we always allow carrying things in the courtyard, just like Shmuel said, people will be utterly confused: things that started Shabbat in a courtyard can be carried to another courtyard, but things that originally were in a house cannot!? Now different things have different laws for carrying!

However, this indeed may be the case, according to Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Shimon trusts people’s intelligence and believes that they won’t be confused. In fact, there was a similar case of three adjoining courtyards where the law depended on which courtyard the object came from, and Rabbi Shimon did not make any additional precautions.

Art: View Of The Roofs Of Paris by Vincent Van Gogh 1853- 1890

Eruvin 90 – Symmetrical arguments

The Talmud lists a number of disagreements between Rav and Shmuel, where each of them reverses his position depending upon the circumstances. All of them are about walls and roofs.

Take, for example, a ship. Rav says that on Shabbat one can carry throughout the entire ship, and Shmuel says that he is allowed to carry objects for only four steps. What is each one’s logic? Rav considers the ship a private area because it is surrounded by the ship’s walls, which make it into a closed partition. However, Shmuel claims that these walls are not made to surround the ship on the sides, but rather to keep the water outside, so they don’t count.

However, even Rav agrees that if one turns the ship upside down, one cannot carry in the area under the ship. Why not? If one intends to live there, it is no worse than a house! – Rather, we are talking about a situation where one overturned the ship in order to tar it. Here the walls are definitely not made to surround the area under the ship – rather, they expose their external side for being tarred. Therefore, they are not considered partitions around the ship, and one cannot carry under it.

Art: On Ship Deck by Louis Anet Sabatier

Eruvin 89 – All the roofs

Although one cannot carry from a courtyard to a courtyard on Shabbat without an eruv (common food), all roofs of the houses are considered one domain, and one can freely carry there, with one limitation only: one roof should not be higher or lower than ten hand-breadths from the other – these are the words of Rabbi Meir. The Sages disagree and say that just as all courtyards are separate areas, so too all roofs are separate areas.

We can understand the Sages, but Rabbi Meir's position seems inconsistent: if all roofs are one area, then what does the difference in height of ten hand-breadths matter? – Rabbi Meir is concerned that if people get used to stepping up and down the roofs, they may come to use a mound ten hand-breadths high, situated in a street, for their needs – and there it would clearly be not allowed.

Rabbi Shimon gives a new rule which changes our understanding of the laws of eruv so far: all roofs - and even all courtyards - combine together into one area, and one can carry there – talking about objects which started Shabbat in a courtyard but not in a house. Thus, if an object was in a house at the beginning of Shabbat, the laws and limitations of eruv apply to it. But if it was in a courtyard, then one can take it to another courtyard even without an eruv.

Art: Blue Roofs Rouen by Paul Gauguin (1848-1903)

Eruvin 88 – Balcony over water

If a balcony protrudes over a body of water, this water is neither a public area (people don’t walk there), nor a private one (it is not surrounded by fences). The Sages called such area a “karmelit”  and prohibited carrying from it to the private domain on Shabbat. Therefore, one cannot draw water to his balcony. To permit this, he must create a fence, a partition either above or below the balcony. The walls of the partition will be considered as if going down to the water level, making this part of the water into his private area, where carrying is permitted.

If one’s courtyard is small, smaller than four by four steps, then he should not pour refuse water into it, because the water will inevitably run outside, and he will have caused it to go from his courtyard into the street. If he makes a cesspool, containing at least 2 se’ah (6 liters) of water, then pouring is allowed. It can be assumed that an average person won’t use more than this amount of water, so it will not flow out. Another way to permit pouring into the courtyard is by building a covered passageway for the water, flowing into the street. In this case, it can be assumed that the water will be absorbed into the ground in the passageway – and if not, its flow into the street will still be unintended, which the Sages did not prohibit.

Art: Venetian Balcony by William Merritt Chase (1849-1916)

Eruvin 87 – A water channel

If a water channel passes through a courtyard, one cannot draw water from on it on Shabbat. This is because the channel comes from a river, and river is a special area, called “karmelit,” which we discussed earlier, and carrying from which is not allowed.

The only solution that they have is to put up a separation ten hand-breadths high at the channel's entrance into the courtyard and at its exit. However, Rabbi Yehudah says that the wall of the courtyard itself can be considered such separation. Rabbi Yehudah brings a proof: “There was a channel in the city of Avel which flowed through multiple coutyards of the city, and the Sages allowed drawing water to every courtyard!” However, Rabbi Yehudah’s opponents replied that this incident is no proof, because the channel was not high and wide enough to represent a significant separate area.

Art: Canal In Amsterdam by Claude Oscar Monet

Eruvin 86 – Water between two courtyards

When someone leaves his home for Shabbat, he still needs to be part of the eruv (common food), since he may return on Shabbat. Rabbi Shimon says that he does not, since it is highly unusual for people to return once they left for Shabbat – with the exception of a parent visiting his or her daughter-in-law, because then if there is a quarrel, it has a tendency to continue.

If there is water, for example, in a cistern, between two courtyards, then when the residents of one courtyard draw water, they are drawing from the other courtyard – because water always mixes – and in the absence of a common eruv, it is prohibited. What is to be done? They must put up a separation, a wall within a cistern. Even an incomplete wall, which only partially shows up and is partially submerged in water, is sufficient – provided that it is ten handbreadths high. There are multiple opinions on the exact position of this separating wall, but all agree that this is a leniency that the Sages gave to the water and that a partial “hanging” separation will not suffice on dry land.

Art: Well Millstone And Cistern Under Trees by Paul Cezanne

Eruvin 84 – Two-storied building

Imagine people living in a two-storied building. The residents of the upper floor ascend there through a staircase, and there is a balcony, or “gallery,” on the second floor. They constitute two different courtyards: the residents living on each level have to make their own eruv (common food) in order to carry on their level on Shabbat.

In addition, they need to make a common eruv between the two floors, something that we previously called the eruv of the alley. What happens when they forget to make the common eruv? – The residents of the upper floor can carry there and in all adjoining areas, and so too the residents of the lower level. Should the residents of the upper floor forget their own eruv, they prohibit carrying not only on their floor, but also on the lower one in the courtyard, because they have the right to go through this courtyard, and they bring with them the limitation that they themselves have.

Which area is considered adjoining to the second level? Any that has the height of ten hand-breadths and which, in addition, is not farther than four hand-breadths from the balcony. This can be, for example, the embankment of a pit or a well situated in the courtyard.

Art: Majas On A Balcony by Francisco De Goya y Lucientes

Eruvin 83 – Does one eat more or less on Shabbat?

The “eruv” in the sense of new residence area where one is allowed to walk, as we discussed before, can be made with any food. If he is making it for many people, then there should be enough for two meals for each. However, this does not mean complete food for two meals, but rather, if he uses, for instance, pies, there should be enough pies to go with two meals. This is true for every type of food.

How large is the size of a meal? Rabbi Meir says that we measure be average weekday meal, since on weekdays one eats less, and on Shabbat he eats more, due to the excellent taste of the food. However, Rabbi Yehudah says that we measure by Shabbat meals, since, on the contrary, on Shabbat one eats less, leaving room for the obligatory third meal of the day. We see that both Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah intended to have less food required for the eruv.

The Talmud continues with other opinions on the measures of the volume of a meal. Some are expressed depending on how much flour one can buy given a specific flour price per pound. Others are based on measures of volume. All are tied to the amount of the manna that was given to the Jews in the desert daily. This is calculated to be the volume of 43.2 average eggs, and it is considered a healthy amount for one’s meal.

Art: Grapes by Kuzma Petrov-Vodkin 1878-1939

Eruvin 82 – Communal residence area

We already saw a number of times that each person is given a limit of how far he can walk on Shabbat, and that is usually two thousand steps from his residence. If one wants to change this limit, he can place food some distance away from his residence, and this then becomes the center of his new residence area. The residence area (techum) is rectangular, measured from his city, from his house, or from his place if he is not in a house or a city.

What if all the residents of a city want to move the limits of their residence (techum) for a particular Shabbat? A messenger can be chosen to take a barrel of food to the new site and place it there, and he also has to acquire it on behalf of all the residents. Whoever of the residents accepts the new residence area on himself before dark, that person can use it, but it is not possible to affect this acceptance after dark when Shabbat has already started.

In addition, one can only change his residence area for the purpose of a mitzvah, such as going to a house of mourning or a wedding banquet.

Art: The wedding feast of Samson by Rembrandt Van Rijn

Eruvin 80 – Food in an alley

In addition to collecting food from all residents in each courtyard, the different courtyards in an alley have to collect food for the common “alley eruv,” in order to allow carrying on Shabbat between courtyards. Practically, however, it may be too burdensome, so instead one can act as follows: he takes a barrel of his own food and declares, “Let this belong to all the residents of the alley.” The declaration alone won’t suffice though, since in every transaction there must be a recipient. Therefore, he asks someone independent of him, even a servant, but not a dependent child, to acquire the barrel on their behalf.

How much food does there have to be? Even the amount of two meals for one person is enough, since this is a significant amount of food, and every one of them can eat it. This amount of food is needed only at the beginning of Shabbat. Later on, if some of it was eaten or lost, it does not matter, as long as a little bit is still extant. Why this leniency? The whole purpose of the eruv is to remind children that carrying in the street on Shabbat is prohibited, as evidenced by the elaborate eruv procedure. Once this goal has been accomplished, some of the food can be eaten.

Art: Still life with food by Mary Ellen Best (1809-1891)

Eruvin 79 – Haystack

If two courtyards have between them a haystack which is ten hand-breadths high, then naturally it separates the two, and they must each make an eruv (common food) for their courtyard, to permit carrying there on Shabbat.

The residents of one courtyard can feed their animals from the haystack, and so can the residents of the other courtyard. Potentially, one might be concerned that the animals will eat the haystack up, making it less than ten hand-breadths in height, and in this way nullifying the partition. The rule above tells us exactly that: we should not be concerned about such a possibility since normally animals don't eat that much in the course of one Shabbat.

However, if the animals ate enough of the straw during the week before Shabbat, and the height of the haystack is lower than ten hand-breadths on a section that is at least ten amot (20 feet) long – the haystack no longer serves as a partition; the people in both courtyards have to join in a common eruv, and they can no longer use their individual eruv for each courtyard.

Art: Haystack At Sunset by Martin Johnson Heade 1819-1904

Eruvin 78 – Ditch

If two courtyards are separated by a ditch that is at least ten hand-breadths deep and four hand-breadths wide, then – since it is not convenient to step over such ditch – it separates the two courtyards into two, and they need to make a separate eruv (common food). This eruv will allow the residents of each courtyard to carry in it, but not into the other courtyard. Even if they fill the ditch with stubble or straw, it still separates them, because those materials will not remain there but will likely be removed. If, however, they fill the ditch with earth or pebbles, then – since those materials will likely stay n there – the ditch has been effectively closed, and they can make only one eruv for all of them.

If they put a board of at least four hand-breadths wide over the ditch, then now they have a choice. If they want, then can look at this board as a connector that allows them to join in a mutual eruv. Or, they can view this board as merely a bridge but not a connector, and create individual eruv for each of the two courtyards.

Art: Clearing a Ditch, 1839 by John Frederick Herring Snr 1795 - 1865

Eruvin 77 – Wall

If there is a wall between two courtyards, and this wall is at least ten hand-breadths high and four hand-breadths thick and, unlike the previous case, there is no window in that wall, then the residents of each of the two courtyards are considered separate from each other, and each courtyard should make an individual eruv (common food) so that they can each carry within their own courtyard.

If there are fruits on top of the wall, then the residents of each courtyard may go up on the wall and eat the fruit while being there. The wall is a separate private area; there is nothing wrong with going there, as well as nothing wrong with eating there. However, none of the courtyard's residents can bring the fruit down into his courtyard, because the wall is not part of an eruv, and he would be transferring from one private domain to another private domain – and that is exactly what the Sages prohibited, in order that the people living in courtyards have some reminder that carrying on Shabbat from a public area (street) to a private area (courtyard) is prohibited by the Torah.

Art: A basket of fruit by Jan Hendrik Aikes

Eruvin 76 – Window

Two courtyards are considered as two separated areas that must each make their own eruv (common food), and then they can carry in each courtyard. What happens if these two courtyards have a common wall, and in addition there is a window in this wall?

In this situation, the window can help both ways. If they want, they can consider the window as connecting the courtyards, making it in fact one courtyard, and then they can make a common eruv for all the residents in both courtyards, so that they can even pass things through that window. Or, if they prefer, they can say that the window does not matter, that the wall between them is a valid partition, dividing them into separate areas, so that each courtyard can make its own eruv.

This is all true, however, only if the window is at least four hand-breadths tall and four hand-breadths wide, and is within ten hand-breadths from the ground. If it is either too small or too high from the ground – they have no choice and must consider the courtyards as two completely separate areas.

Art: In the Courtyard by Wilson Henry Irvine 1869-1936

Eruvin 66 – Giving away

If people live in a common courtyard, it is similar to a street, so as a reminder for the kids, the Sages told to collect common food, put it in one of the houses, and thus make everyone as one family – and that makes carrying things in the courtyard permissible.

However, even if they did not do so, there is still a device they can use: one of them, who has not joined the eruv, can give away his rights in the courtyard so that he does not prohibit the others to carry. Even if all did not join the eruv, they can all give their rights to one of them, and be permitted to carry.

However, Shmuel formulated three rules which sound like “if they forbid – they can make an eruv,” and which teach that giving away the rights is only a dispensation given when necessary and if, had the eruv been made, it would have been effective.

Art: A Spanish Courtyard by Enrique Roldan

Eruvin 64 – Nice law

Earlier we said that one who does not accept the law of the eruv ruins it for the other residents of the courtyard, making it prohibited for them to carry things in their own courtyard on Shabbat. However, there is a loophole: one can rent this person’s rights in the courtyard, and even from his servant. One can also become friendly with the person, do him some service, and be considered his servant for this.

On hearing this rule, Rav Nachman said, “How nice is it!” However, on hearing another rule, that one who drank wine (even 2-3 ounces) cannot render legal decisions, he said, “This is not nice. I, for one, cannot judge until I clear my mind with wine.” However, Rava quoted to him, “One who sees prostitutes will lose his wealth.” The word “prostitutes,” “zonot” in Hebrew, can be understood as “zo nae”, which means “this one is nice,” so allegorically one he says “this law is nice, this one is not” will lose his learning. Rav Nachman said, “I am convinced and change my mind .”

Art: A seated Peasant drinking in an Interior by Dutch School