Mishnah.org Logo
Perek 7

Mishnayos Eruvin Perek 7 Mishnah 11

עירובין פרק ז׳ משנה י"א

11
A person may give a ma’a coin to a grocer or a baker, if they live in the same alleyway or courtyard, so that the grocer or baker will confer upon him possession of wine or bread for a merging of the alleyway or an eiruv, if other residents come to them to purchase these products for that purpose. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Rabbis say: His money did not confer possession on him, as the transfer of money alone is not a valid mode of acquisition and cannot confer possession. One must perform a valid mode of acquisition, e.g., pulling an article into one’s possession, to transfer ownership. And the Rabbis concede with regard to all other people, apart from grocers and bakers, that if one gave them money for the food of an eiruv, his money confers possession upon him, as one may establish an eiruv for a person only with his knowledge and at his bidding. With regard to a grocer or baker, the person giving the money does not intend to appoint the grocer or the baker as his agent and the money itself does not effect an acquisition, and consequently, he did not accomplish anything. With regard to anyone else, however, there is no doubt that he must have intended to appoint him his agent, and his act is effective. Rabbi Yehuda said: In what case is this statement said? It is said with regard to a joining of Shabbat boundaries, but with regard to a joining of courtyards, one may establish an eiruv for a person either with his knowledge or without his knowledge. The reason is because one may act for a person’s benefit in his absence, but one may not act to a person’s disadvantage in his absence. As a participant in a joining of courtyards benefits from his inclusion in the eiruv, his consent is not required. However, with regard to a joining of Shabbat boundaries, although it enables one to go farther in one direction, he loses the option of traveling in the opposite direction. When an action is to a person’s disadvantage, or if it entails both benefits and disadvantages, one may act on that person’s behalf only if he has been explicitly appointed his agent.
נוֹתֵן אָדָם מָעָה לְחֶנְוָנִי וּלְנַחְתּוֹם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה לוֹ עֵרוּב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, לֹא זָכוּ לוֹ מְעוֹתָיו. וּמוֹדִים בִּשְׁאָר כָּל אָדָם שֶׁזָּכוּ לוֹ מְעוֹתָיו, שֶׁאֵין מְעָרְבִין לְאָדָם אֶלָּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, בְּעֵרוּבֵי תְחוּמִין, אֲבָל בְּעֵרוּבֵי חֲצֵרוֹת, מְעָרְבִין לְדַעְתּוֹ וְשֶׁלֹּא לְדַעְתּוֹ, לְפִי שֶׁזָּכִין לְאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו, וְאֵין חָבִין לְאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו:
י"א

נותן אדם מעה לחנוני – the person who sells win, and lives with him in the alleyway.

או לנחתום – the person who sells loaves [of bread] and lives with him in the courtyard, that he should obtain a privilege for him in the Eruv with his fellows. If the members of the alleyway come to acquire from you wine in partnership, or the members of the courtyard to acquire loaves [of bread] for the Eruv, that I will have a portion in it.

לא זכו לו מעותיו – for money does not purchase until he “pulls,” and even that this storekeeper made an Eruv for all of the others and to effect a possession also to that one, it is not an Eruv, for behold, he did not intend to cause him possess through a gift for nothing like the rest who effect a possession in the Eruv, other than that he should acquire it through a M’ah, for behold, he does not acquire it for him, for money does not acquire and it is found that the makes an Eruv for him with his money.

ומודים בשאר כל אדם – the houseowner whose fellow said to him: “Here is this M’ah; and effect possession for me in the Eruv, and he went and obtained the privilege for, for he acquired an Eruv. But since the houseowner does not customarily sell loaves of bread, he did not intend for this, but rather, to make him an agent and it would be made like one who said to him – “make an Eruv for me.”

שאין מערבין לאדם – when they make an Eruv for him from on his own, but rather [it should be done] with his knowledge. Therefore, regarding the storekeeper, when he said to him, “effect possession [in the Eruv],” he did not intend other than to acquire from him, but he did not rely upon him that he should become his agent, but money does not purchase/acquire, and he didn’t rely upon him; it is found that he is enabling possession [of the Eruv] for him without his knowledge/consent.

עירובי תחומין – it is a liability that he loses to the side of the other, and perhaps it is not pleasing to him. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

נותן אדם מעה לחנוני. המוכר יין, ודר עמו במבוי:

או לנחתום. המוכר ככרות ודר עמו בחצר שיזכה לו בעירוב עם חבריו. אם יבואו בני מבוי לקנות ממך יין לשתוף, או בני חצר לקנות ככר לעירוב, שיהיה לי חלק בו:

לא זכו לו מעותיו. שאין מעות קונות עד שימשוך. ואפילו עירב זה החנוני לכל האחרים וזכה גם לזה, אינו עירוב, שהרי לא נתכוין לזכות לו במתנת חנם כשאר המזכין בעירוב אלא שיקנה במעה, והרי אינה קונה לו דמעות אינן קונות ונמצא מערב לו במעותיו:

ומודים בשאר כל אדם. בעל הבית שאמר לו חבירו הילך מעה זו וזכה לי בעירוב והלך וזיכה לו, שקנה עירוב, דהואיל ואין בעל הבית רגיל למכור ככרות לא נתכוין זה אלא לעשותו שליח ונעשה כאומר לו ערב לי:

שאין מערבין לאדם. כשמערבין לו משלו אלא מדעתו. הלכך גבי חנוני כי אמר לו זכה לי לא נתכוין אלא לקנות ממנו ולא סמך עליו שיעשה שלוחו ומעות אינן קונות ולא סמכיה דעתיה נמצא מערב לו שלא מדעתו:

עירובי תחומין. חוב הוא שמפסיד לצד האחר ושמא אין נוח לו. והלכה כר׳ יהודה: