Yerushalmi Eruvin 2:1 ירושלמי עירובין ב׳:א׳

MISHNAH: One makes planks for wells, four double columns¹The word seems to be a Greek-Hebrew hybrid, δύο-עֲמוּדִים “double column”. The circular well is in the middle of a square; at each corner one erects planks 10 hand-breadths high and on each side 6 wide. Since from each side one sees two planks, these are “4 looking like 8”. Since the opening between two planks, space in excess of the width of 6 cows for R. Meïr or eight for R. Jehudah, is more than what is permitted as opening of a wall of a private domain, special rules are needed to permit grazing animals to drink from a well. Even though the meadows on which they are grazing is public domain or karmelit, the well or cistern is private domain if it is at least 10 hand-breadths deep. Therefore one has to see to it that the animals drink in a private domain. R. Meïr requires a straight plank (of indeterminate width) after a 5 cubits opening. which look like eight, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Meïr says eight which look like twelve, eight double columns and four simple ones, their height ten [hand-breadths], and their width six, and their thickness arbitrary. And between them the width of two teams of three cattle each, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says of four each, tied together rather than loose, one entering and one leaving²As explained at the end of the discussion of this Mishnah, the space between two planks can be 10 cubits for R. Meïr and almost 14 for R. Jehudah..

HALAKHAH: “One makes planks for wells,” etc. Since what is breached is more than what is standing he makes double columns but not simple ones, which proves by itself that it is because of access to the well. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: You are reaching here what are the limits of domains of the Sabbath, for if he did so at (one)¹⁷With the later prints of the Yerushalmi one has to read here אַחֵר “another”. If one puts up four double-planks anywhere else so that the opening is wider than the standing walls it does not mean anything. If within this space one throws something more than 4 cubits it is throwing in the public domain and a Sabbath violation. The Babli 20a reads differently. place and then threw there four cubits in the public domain he would be liable. Rebbi Yose said, since you were lenient with him about what is breached may be more than what is standing, you are strict with him in another matter since everywhere else one makes a plank of four hand- breadths but here he makes a plank of six hand-breadths¹⁸Both aspects, the corner planks and their width, are required to make it clear that these rules are valid exclusively for water sources but nothing else..

Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: They permitted planks for wells only for pilgrims¹⁹The three yearly pilgrimages to the Temple. This implies that after the destruction of the Temple all the rules of the present Chapter became obsolete. Babli 20b as accepted doctrine.. Rav Abin said, at the time of pilgrimage²⁰The suspension of the universal requirement that “what is standing must be more than what is breached” is authorized only temporarily for the needs of actual pilgrims.. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: Because of the pilgrims²¹But along the pilgrim’s route from Babylonia to Jerusalem the installations are permanent.. Rebbi Ezra said before Rebbi Mana, the Mishnah implies that one makes planks for wells in the present time²²Since the Mishnah is formulated in the present it must be valid in the present, after the destruction of the Temple and the end of pilgrimages.. But did we not state²³Mishnah 10:12., “one fills from the cistern of the diaspora with a wheel on the Sabbath, from the large cistern, etc.” Why “may one fill from the cold well²⁴While the cisterns mentioned in the Mishnah were on the Temple Mount, the well was somewhere on the pilgrims’ route. Using a mechanical contraption is rabinically forbidden on the holiday since one might be tempted to fix it in case it broke on the holiday. with a wheel on the holiday”? But at the time when Israel came from the diaspora and camped at this well, the prophets among them stipulated that that one could fill from the cold well with a wheel on the holiday²⁵Babli 104b. Tosephta 8:22.. They did not permit all cold wells, only this well at which they camped. As you are saying there, what was permitted was permitted, and here what was permitted was permitted. Rebbi Eudaimon from Haifa instructed in Haifa, Rebbi Jeremiah instructed in Ḥelef about planks for wells in the present time²⁶The Babylonian point of view is rejected..

They wanted to say that Rebbi Meïr would admit to Rebbi Jehudah, Rebbi Jehudah will not admit to Rebbi Meïr²⁷Since R. Jehudah permits a wider opening, he cannot agree to R. Meïr’s lower limit. But R. Meïr could agree that R. Jehudah is correct in principle; only for practical reasons he prescribes a narrower opening.. Rebbi Meïr will admit to Rebbi Jehudah? Does not Rebbi Meïr have simple poles, and you are saying so? If you are making double columns but no straight poles, he²⁸An uninformed person who sees the surroundings of a well turned into a private domain by 4 double poles would think that any domain might be turned into one where carrying is permitted by the same device. But since he sees that at regular intervals simple planks are required he will inquire about the rules and be told that in all other cases the length of the walls has to exceed the lengths of the openings. would think, perhaps a partition for the Sabbath is made in this way; he would make it in other places and become liable. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: Neither of them yields to the other. Rebbi Mana said, even though Rebbi Yose (about)²⁹For דכי read רבי “my teacher Rebbi Yose said”. did not say this, he said something similar. Rebbi Bun and Rebbi Bun³⁰Read “R. Abun and R. Abin”, cf. Chapter 1, Note 279. asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: How far away does a double column have to be so it would not need a straight [plank]³¹When would R. Meïr dispense with straight planks? Babli 19b.? He told him, less than three [hand-breadths] is considered closed, more than six is far away³²As long as one can disregard a distance of 3-ε on each side, nothing additional is required.. Therefore we have to consider from three to four. If you would say that Rebbi Meïr yields to Rebbi Jehudah, should he not make a double column far away and not need a simple [plank]³³This quote of R. Zeˋira’s explanation is R. Mana’s proof that R. Zeˋira also holds that R. Meïr cannot agree with R. Jehudah in principle since he would have to indicate how it would be possible to make the enclosure without straight planks.? Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, Rebbi Meïr requires simple [planks] only according to Rebbi Jehudah’s method³⁴He wants to split the Mishnah into two parts and indicate that straight planks are needed only for a large width following R. Jehudah.. Rebbi Yose said, even according to his own method, since in any case what is standing is not more than what is breached. Since what is standing should be more than what is breached it needs a simple [plank]³⁵Since the Mishnah about enclosing a well in any case contradicts our principle that “what is standing must be more than what is breached”, R. Meïr’s insistence on straight planks is one of principle, not of practical consideration as suggested at the start of this discussion..

“If one big stone was there one sees that if it is split and there be six [hand-breadths] in both directions it is considered a double column.³⁶Tosephta 1:12, Babli 19b. If the stone has a square base and each side is six hand-breadths long it is counted as double column.” Some Tannaim state, if it is hollowed out. They wanted to say that he who says, if it is hollowed out, measures from the inside while he who says, if it is split, measures from the outside. Rebbi Yose said, would you not let it stand if it was like garlic skin³⁷Since the Mishnah does not prescribe depth of columns or planks there is no practical difference whether one measures from the outside or from the inside of an arbitrarily thin membrane.? This implies that both he who says that it is split as also he who says it is hollowed out measures from the inside. He who says, if it is hollowed out, if it is round³⁸If the base of the stone is circular the radius, not the diameter, must be 6 hand-breadth (1 cubit). In Babli and Tosephta this is an explicit statement by R. Ismael ben R. Joḥanan ben Beroqa.; he who says, if it is split, if it is square. You should know that it is so since one Tanna said to the other, the only difference between my formulation and yours is that you are speaking of a round one but I about a square one.

If there was a ditch ten [hand-breadths] deep and four wide, and it extends six in each direction³⁹At a corner two ditches, 1 cubit long, ²/₃ cubits wide and 1²/₃ cubits deep are the replacement of a double column erected there., it is judged to be a double column. Not only a ditch but also a heap⁴⁰A rudimentary wall also counts if it has the necessary dimensions.. Partially a ditch and partially a heap? If there were five sticks with less than three [hand-breadths] between them which together cover six [hand-breadths] in each direction, they are judged to be a double column⁴¹Since any opening of less than 3 hand-breadths is disregarded, the five sticks (two at each side and one at the right angle) stand for solid walls of 1 cubit length in each direction.. If there were three⁴²Three sticks at ABC form an isosceles right angled triangle with vertex B and edge length 6 hand-breadths. and he tied bast on top, would this save as symbolic fence? Does not a symbolic fence save only if it is proven from each side⁴³Chapter 1 Note 274.? Then what was tied around is as if blocked. Similar to what you are saying there, one sees that if it is split and there would be six [hand-breadths] in both directions it is considered a double column, could you say the same here? There would you not let it stand if it was like garlic skin; here what can you say? If you would say so you would abrogate the rules of symbolic fences⁴⁴There are no exceptions to the rule indicated in the preceding Note..

A wall, and a tree, and a copse of reeds are counted as double columns⁴⁵Babli 15a, 19b, Šabbat 24b.. If they grew by themselves one may carry there up to an area of two bet se’ah. If he planted them with his hands one may carry there even one or two bet kor⁴⁶Chapter 1, Note 288.. If there was one large well and he made [the double columns] for one half but not for the other half. For the half for which he made it it is permitted, for the half for which he did not make it it is forbidden. If there were two, could the space in-between be considered for both sides? What is his problem? If both were used to fill; but if only one was used to fill it is usable for both sides⁴⁷If separate symbolic enclosures were made for two adjacent wells and one set of double columns serves for both enclosures, it is clear that one may not simultaneously draw water from both wells since this would use the middle double pillars in two contradictory ways. (This implies that they were double, not triple, i. e., shaped like a Γ but not a Τ.) But if at one time only one well is used, the next time the other well may be used, even on the same Sabbath..

From a courtyard open to planks one carries from the courtyard to the planks but not from the planks to the courtyard⁴⁸Tosephta 1:15 and Babli 20a disagree with this Yerushalmi in principle. The courtyard is walled in according to the rules that what is standing must be more than what is open; there one carries according to the general rules. It is open to a place where carrying is permitted only for the needs of animals; this place is an appendix of the courtyard but the courtyard is not an appendix to the place.. Therefore two are forbidden⁴⁹If two different courtyards open on the well, the well cannot belong to two different domains; therefore it belongs to neither of them.. Rebbi Abba said, not only two courtyards but even a single courtyard and in it two houses⁵⁰And each of the houses has a backdoor opening on the well.. They thought to say if they did not make an eruv; therefore if they made an eruv it would be permitted. Rebbi Daniel the son of Rav Qatina in the name of Rav Ḥuna: even if they made an eruv it is forbidden, for the eruv does not make them one⁵¹The permission to use the well is given only if there is a single opening from the courtyard to the well.. Rav Ḥuna follows his opinion, as they disagreed: An alley in which on one side dwelt a Gentile and on the other a Jew, Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: even if they made an eruv through doors the Gentile prohibits it for them⁵²Since the Gentile is not subject to the laws of the Sabbath he cannot agree to a change of status of the alley for the Sabbath even if otherwise the eruv was totally conforming to the rules.. Abba bar bar Ḥana in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even if they made the eruv through windows the Gentile does not prohibit for them⁵³In his opinion the Gentile is irrelevant for the rules of the Sabbath even if the houses which are united by the eruv share only windows, not full door openings.. Even if Rav Ḥuna would hold with Rebbi Joḥanan that there it is permitted, here he has to agree that it is forbidden. There, maybe tomorrow the well will run dry and then he would think that perhaps an eruv is efficient for the planks of wells when an eruv is not efficient for the planks of wells⁵⁴The prohibition of a well which is accessible from two different courtyards is based on a practical problem rather than a legal principle; one has to avoid giving the impression that courtyards joined in an eruv have any impact on the rules of wells surrounded by double columns. If the well runs dry before the Sabbath the double columns lose all their meaning..

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, they permitted the planks of wells only to draw water⁵⁵Babli 21a.. If water came on the Sabbath, the Sabbath already came with prohibition. If the well dried out, the Sabbath already came with permission⁵⁶Babli 20a disagrees in both cases.. Rebbi Jonah said that Rebbi Nasa asked, may one carry between the planks⁵⁷He questions R, Yose ben R. Abun’s statement.? We should say that if there are four hand-breadths between one and the other it is like a prohibited threshold, otherwise like a permitted threshold, permitted for both domains; only one should not exchange⁵⁸Chapter 1, Note 162..

It was stated, there are about ten cubits, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says, like thirteen or fourteen minus^2,As explained at the end of the discussion of this Mishnah, the space between two planks can be 10 cubits for R. Meïr and almost 14 for R. Jehudah.⁵⁹Both R. Meïr and R. Jehudah presume that an average cow is 1.5 cubits wide and between the two teams one leaves 1 cubit of space. R. Meïr permits space for 6 cows, 9 cubits, + 1 cubit. R. Jehudah for 8 cows, 12 cubits, + 1 cubit, for a width of 13 cubits. He admits a wider room for moving of the cows and accepts any distance less than 14 cubits.
פרא is Latin parum “too little, not enough”. In Demay 5:2 the expression is פָּרָא צִיבְחַר “less a little bit.”: a cubit, a half, and one cubit interspace⁶⁰Discussion of Mishnah 2..