Yerushalmi Eruvin 3:8 ירושלמי עירובין ג׳:ח׳

MISHNAH: Rebbi Jehudah said, if a person was afraid that the New Year’s Day might be complemented²⁵This refers to the times when the calendar was not computed but the day of the New Moon was determined by observation. Outside the seat of the Synhedrion the day of the New Moon of Tishre, which is New Year’s Day in the Baylonian calendar, had to be observed for two days since it could be either the 30^th or the 31^st of Elul. This is the only holiday falling on a New Moon. While the holiday lasts two days, it is clear that this is not a question of two distinct sanctities but in fact one of the days is really a weekday, the other a holiday, only it is not known which is which. Rebbi Jehudah, the student of R. Eliezer’s student, follows R. Eliezer and permits two different eruvin. The Sages hold that the two days are legally one long holiday., he makes two eruvin and says, my first eruv should be to the East and the second to the West, the first to the West and the second to the East, my eruv for the first day and on the second like the people of my village, for the second day but the first day like the people of my village. But the Sages did not agree with him.

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. “Rebbi Jehudah said, if a person was afraid that the New Year’s Day might be complemented²⁵This refers to the times when the calendar was not computed but the day of the New Moon was determined by observation. Outside the seat of the Synhedrion the day of the New Moon of Tishre, which is New Year’s Day in the Baylonian calendar, had to be observed for two days since it could be either the 30^th or the 31^st of Elul. This is the only holiday falling on a New Moon. While the holiday lasts two days, it is clear that this is not a question of two distinct sanctities but in fact one of the days is really a weekday, the other a holiday, only it is not known which is which. Rebbi Jehudah, the student of R. Eliezer’s student, follows R. Eliezer and permits two different eruvin. The Sages hold that the two days are legally one long holiday.,” etc. ¹⁶⁹This paragraph also is in Ševiˋit 9:1 (Notes 24–30,7) and Beṣah 1:1 (60a l. 62,י). The latter text is the original. The introductory sentence, “because they disagreed” makes no sense here but is intelligible in the two parallel sources.
While the starting quote is from Mishnah 10, the entire discussion refers to Mishnah 9, a Sabbath preceded or followed by a holiday which is not New Year’s Day. Because they disagreed: May the remainders of a wick, a fire, or oil that burned out on the Sabbath be lit on the holiday¹⁷⁰If the holiday falls on a Sunday, since it is forbidden to light fire on the Sabbath, the unburned oil or wood that was burning at the onset of the Sabbath, but later burned out or was extinguished by the wind are no longer usable on the Sabbath, they become muqṣeh. The rule that (Ex. 16:5) they have to prepare what they are Goin Gto use is given for the Sabbath but is transferred to holidays. Then since oil or wood were not usable a minute before the start of the holiday they cannot become usable on the holiday. If the rule is not transferred, the fuel becomes permitted at the end of the Sabbath.? Rav and Rebbi Ḥanina both say it is forbidden, but Rebbi Joḥanan says, it is permitted. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yudan, is it the reverse regarding an egg¹⁷¹Mishnah Beṣah 1:1: “An egg laid on the holiday, the House of Shammai say, may be eaten; the House of Hillel say, it may not be eaten.” According to the Yerushalmi, in the opinion of the House of Shammai the egg is prepared since the hen itself is potential food and an egg inside a slaughtered hen is permitted food. According to the House of Hillel, the egg becomes something new by being laid. The new egg was not in existence before the holiday.? He said to him, since the rabbis compare it, it means that the two cases are identical¹⁷²At least for the House of Hillel. Tosephta Yom Tov 1:3: “An egg laid on the Sabbath may be eaten on the holiday. R. Jehudah said in the name of R. Eliezer, the dispute is the same.”. They said in the name of four Elders¹⁷³According to the Babli 38b the Elders are Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, R. Ismael ben R. Joḥanan ben Beroqa, R. Eleazar ben R. Simeon, and R. Yose ben R. Jehudah. In Tosephta 4:2 the statement is R. Meïr’s.: If somebody’s eruv was eaten on the first [day] he is like the people of his town on the second [day]. Rav Ḥuna said in the name of Rav: Practice follows the four Elders¹⁷⁴“There” is Eruvin, “here” is Beṣah, about the leftover fuel. If the status regarding the eruv can change from day to day, it is difficult to see why using the fuel should be forbidden. The Babli notes that Rav Ḥisda asked his question only after Rav Ḥuna’s death.. Rav Ḥisda asked: the argument of Rav seems to be inverted. There, he makes it two sanctities, but here he makes it one sanctity. Because they disagreed: May the remainders of a wick, a fire, or oil that burned out on the Sabbath be lit on the holiday? Rav and Rebbi Ḥanina both say it is forbidden, but Rebbi Joḥanan says, it is permitted. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yudan, is it the reverse regarding an egg? He said to him, since the rabbis compare it, it means that the two cases are identical¹⁷⁶For R. Aḥa it is a tradition which he learned from his teacher, for R. Yose it is a logical inference..

Rebbi Aḥa said it from study, Rebbi Yose said it from reflection¹⁷⁶For R. Aḥa it is a tradition which he learned from his teacher, for R. Yose it is a logical inference.; the four Elders concur with Rebbi Eliezer¹⁷⁷R. Eliezer holds that on two consecutive days, one a Sabbath and one a holiday, a person may make two different eruvim. The Elders hold that if the eruv is nonexistent at the start of the second day, the person is no longer bound by it and therefore moves in a different domain on the second day.. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yose: between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Jehudah, does practice not follow Rebbi Jehudah¹⁷⁸A generally recognized principle, Babli 46b, Yerushalmi Terumot 3:1 (Note 26).? The four Elders concur with Rebbi Eliezer! Since there where his eruv did not enter in force did I not say that he removed his feet from the inhabitants of his town, here where his eruv did enter in force not so much more¹⁷⁹The argument here and in the following refers to the disagreements between R. Meïr and R. Jehudah in Mishnaiot 4:10–11. In Mishnah 10 R. Meïr permits only a poor person to make an eruv without anything, just by being at the Sabbath boundary at the start of the Sabbath, as if he were a traveller arriving at that spot which becomes his Sabbath center. R. Jehudah permits the same for everybody. Mishnah 11 is about a person sent to make an eruv for an entire village when on the way he was persuaded by somebody not to complete his errand where R. Jehudah, whom practice follows, holds consistently with his opinion in Mishnah 10 that he can walk as if he made the eruv since near sundown he was on his way.
In case of Mishnah 4:11 the fact that he started going away lets him move his Sabbath domain without an eruv, in the case of the four elders where there was a valid eruv for the first day it is difficult to understand why the eruv should have disappeared for the second day unless one follows R. Eliezer whom practice is not supposed to follow.? If he made an eruv with a loaf on the first [day], he makes the eruv with a loaf on the second, but it must be the same loaf. If he made an eruv with his feet on the first [day], he makes the eruv with his feet on the second¹⁸⁰Babli 39a in the name of Samuel. As the Babli explains, one may not start a new eruv on a Sabbath or holiday; therefore either one uses the loaf which had been used for the first day or one makes the eruv by walking following Mishnah 4:10.. If he made an eruv with his feet, may he make an eruv with a loaf, with a loaf may he not make an eruv with his feet? Since you are saying there, with his feet he may not make an eruv with a loaf, then with (his feet) [with a loaf]¹⁸¹The scribe wrote “his feet”, the corrector wrongly corrected to “a loaf”. may he not make the eruv with his feet¹⁸²If one may not start a new eruv on a Sabbath or holiday; then maybe one may not go to validate the eruv for the second day since it will look as if one made it new for that day.? To make it easy for the poor person who has no loaf. Since you are saying there, with his feet he may not make an eruv with a loaf, then with with a loaf may he not make the eruv with his feet? To make it easy for the rich person that he does not have to go and make the eruv with his feet¹⁸³Using the loaf first and then walking there also looks as if the eruv for the second day were different from that for the first and should be forbidden.. Since you are saying there, with his feet he may not make an eruv with a loaf, then with a loaf may he not make the eruv with a loaf? Rebbi Abun in the name of the rabbis there, they made him as if going to his town¹⁸⁴Using the loaf twice will not look like making two eruvim but since the loaf was at its place at sundown the first day he only goes home to where his Sabbath or holiday center was at the beginning of the first day..