Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Eruvin 6:4 - 6:5

The Mishnah Yomi for Wednesday, November 15, 2028 is Eruvin 6:4 - 6:5

＜ Previous DayTodayNext Day ＞

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Eruvin Perek 6 Mishnah 4

עירובין פרק ו׳ משנה ד׳

4
The mishna poses a general question: When may one give away rights in a domain? Beit Shammai say: While it is still day, i.e., before the onset of Shabbat; and Beit Hillel say: Even after nightfall, when it is already Shabbat. The mishna cites another dispute: If one gave away his rights in his courtyard to the other residents of the courtyard, renouncing them after having forgotten to establish an eiruv with them the previous day, and then he carried something out from his house into the courtyard – whether unwittingly, forgetting that he had renounced his rights, or intentionally, he renders carrying prohibited for all the residents of the courtyard, for his action cancels his renunciation; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: If he acted intentionally, he renders carrying prohibited; but if he acted unwittingly, he does not render carrying prohibited.
מֵאֵימָתַי נוֹתְנִין רְשׁוּת. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, מִשֶּׁחֲשֵׁכָה. מִי שֶׁנָּתַן רְשׁוּתוֹ וְהוֹצִיא, בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד, הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹסֵר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּמֵזִיד אוֹסֵר, בְּשׁוֹגֵג אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר:
ד׳

ב"ש אומרים מבעוד יום – they hold that resigning possession causes the acquisition of possession and the acquisition of possession on the Sabbath is prohibited.

וב"ה אומרים אף משתחשך – they hold that resignation does not acquire possession but it removes it from possession and removal from possession on the Sabbath is all right. But in the Baraitha (Talmud Eruvin 70b), they explained that in every place where we say, that where it is prohibited for part of the Sabbath, it is prohibited for the entire Sabbath, except for one who resigns possession.

מי שנתן רשותו והוציא – for he came back and used the possession that he had resigned.

אחד שוגג ואחד מזיד – because the fine for an inadvertent act is because of a wanton act, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

ב״ש אומרים מבעוד יום. דסברי ביטול רשות מקנה רשותא הוא, ומקנה רשות בשבת אסור:

וב״ה אומרים אף משתחשך. סברי ביטול לאו אקנויי רשותא הוא אלא אסתלוקי מרשותא, ואסתלוקי מרשותא בשבת שפיר דמי. ובברייתא פירשו דבכל דוכתא אמרינן כיון שנאסר למקצת שבת נאסר לכולה חוץ ממבטל רשות:

מי שנתן רשותו והוציא. שחזר ונשתמש ברשות שבטל:

אחד שוגג ואחד מזיד. דקניס שוגג אטו מזיד. ואין הלכה כר״מ:

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Eruvin Perek 6 Mishnah 5

עירובין פרק ו׳ משנה ה׳

5
If a homeowner was in partnership with his neighbors, with this one in wine and with that one in wine, they need not establish an eiruv, for due to their authentic partnership they are considered to be one household, and no further partnership is required. If, however, he was in partnership with this one in wine and with that one in oil, they must establish an eiruv. As they are not partners in the same item, they are not all considered one partnership. Rabbi Shimon says: In both this case and that case, i.e., even if he partners with his neighbors in different items, they need not establish an eiruv.
בַּעַל הַבַּיִת שֶׁהָיָה שֻׁתָּף לִשְׁכֵנִים, לָזֶה בְיַיִן וְלָזֶה בְיַיִן, אֵינָם צְרִיכִים לְעָרֵב. לָזֶה בְיַיִן וְלָזֶה בְשֶׁמֶן, צְרִיכִים לְעָרֵב. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה, אֵינָם צְרִיכִים לְעָרֵב:
ה׳

שהוא שותף עם שכניו – that are in the alley for the purpose of an undefined partnership and not for the sake of an Eruv.

א"צ לערב – and it is that all of them will be partners in one utensil and specifically a combination of alleys that were [partners] in wine, as is taught in the Mishnah (Chapter 3, Mishnah 1): That they may prepare the Eruv and contribute to a partnership Eruv [with anything] (other than water or salt), but the Eruvim of courtyards, they don’t make an Eruv other than with bread, for it is an Eruv on account of dwelling and in the human dwelling the heart of a person is not drawn to anything other than to bread, and if he partnered in a combination of alleys with bread, all the more so that it is considered more and they rely upon that partnership of bread in the place of an Eruv but one does not need to make an Eruv of courtyards but if they partnered in wine or in other things, they must make an Eruv of courtyards and they don’t rely upon the partnership in order that the concept of Eruv should not be forgotten from the young children.

ר"ש אומר – but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

שהוא שותף עם שכניו. שבמבוי, לשם שותפות בעלמא ולא לשם עירוב:

א״צ לערב. והוא שיהיו כולן שותפין בכלי אחד. ודוקא שתופי מבואות הוו ביין כדתנן בכל מערבין ומשתתפין, אבל עירובי חצירות אין מערבין אלא בפת, דעירוב משום דירה הוא ודירה של אדם אין לבו נמשך אלא בפת. ואם שתף שתופי מבואות בפת כ״ש דחשיב טפי וסומכין על אותו שתוף של פת במקום עירוב וא״צ לערב עירובי חצירות, אבל אם נשתתפו ביין או בשאר דברים צריכים לערב עירובי חצירות ואין סומכין על השתוף, כדי שלא תשתכח תורת עירוב מן התינוקות:

ר״ש אומר כו׳ ואין הלכה כר״ש:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us