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

MISHNAH: From a balcony above the sea one may not draw water on the Sabbath unless one made a partition ten hand-breadths high either above or below²³The house is on a lakeshore, the balcony is built over the lake, and there is a hole in the balcony through which a pail may be lowered to draw water. While obviously water is always moving and it cannot be asserted that water drops found under the balcony on the Sabbath were there at sundown, since the restriction is purely rabbinic it is enough that under the balcony one make a symbolic wall whose extension would enclose the water.. Similarly, two balconies one on top of the other²⁴Over the same water, with the holes in the balconies one directly on top of the other., if they made for the upper one but not for the lower one both are forbidden until they make an eruv.

HALAKHAH: Paragraph⁹⁰Discussion of Mishnah 9.. Rebbi Zeˋira, Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Only if the partition is lowered into the water to lower a pail⁷⁴Since water is always moving, it is impossible to know which molecules will be where at a given time. The answer is that this is irrelevant; at the time the pail is lowered it will draw water only from the side of the cistern allocated to its part. Babli 86b.. Do not two different domains use the same domain⁹¹This refers to the second case of the Mishnah, that two balconies are built over the sea, one on top of the other (S. Liebermann). Since the Mishnah states that they did not make a common eruv, how can the upper floor draw water through the domain of the lower balcony?? Rav Huna said, only if the partition be within three hand-breadths of the balcony⁹²The upper balcony can draw water only if it is wider than the lower one and the pail is lowered outside the lower balcony, more than 3 hand-breadths removed from it. Then the water is drawn in a domain unique to the upper balcony..

It was stated: ⁹³A different version is in Babli, 97b. One should not explain the Yerushalmi on the basis of the different Babli version. Rebbi Ḥanania ben Aqabia says, if a balcony protrudes over the sea, one opens the floor covering, lowers down, and fills. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yasa: Only if the hole is four hand-breadths long, and only if it is four hand-breadths wide, and if the walls are ten hand-breadths high⁹⁴If the enclosure of the balcony is 10 hand-breadths high it may serve as the required partition for the House of Hillel; then a hole up to 4-by-4 hand-breadths large can be made in the floor of the balcony to draw water.. There⁹⁵In Babylonia. they are saying, even if the partitions are not ten hand-breadths high it is made like a funnel⁹⁶The walls of the balcony together with the floor form an oversized funnel which is made to connect with the water below. This is enough of a distinction not to require walls ten cubits high. (The Babli 16a/b which requires the balcony to be a hammock is difficult to understand.). Rebbi Idi said before Rebbi Ḥiyya: One is permitted to fill but forbidden to pour out⁹⁷With a different interpretation, as Babylonian rule, in Babli 88a.. He said to him, when we will ordain Sages, we shall ordain you with them⁹⁸This must be meant ironically since R. Idi already was ordained. The question is, is it ironic since the statement is obvious or is it a criticism because the statement is false?. Rebbi Mana said, he shouted⁹⁹Arabic مجهر “shouting”. In a parallel expression Yebamot 8:6 (Note 230), R. Mana uses מְגָחֵךְ “made fun of”. This may be the intended word here also. at him. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Bun said, did he not say to him that one is permitted to fill, since he fills inside his partition, but forbidden to pour out, for he pours outside of his partition¹⁰⁰It certainly is rabbinically forbidden to pour water from a private domain directly into a karmelit, such as the sea. As noted in the sequel, the sea intended is a lake.?

Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, Rebbi Ḥanania ben Aqabia said it only for Lake Genezareth since mountains surround it¹⁰¹A similar statement in the Babli 87b, but there the reason given is that the shore of the lake is everywhere private domain with no public access to the water except harbors which also are private installations for the rules of the Sabbath. The statement here, that a valley surrounded by mountains is never public domain, is not found elsewhere.. Rebbi Eleazar asked Rebbi Joḥanan, if one threw from a circular road¹⁰²This word appears in many forms is the Yerushalmi: Berakhot 9:2 (Note 81) פווסרוס ,פופסדס, Terumot 8:10 ,אפיפסרוס אפיפסרון (but this may be another word), Šeqalim 7:2 פיוסרוס. S. Liebermann identifies the word as πρόσοδος, ἡ, “access road”. This assumes that Roman roads in the East where built in the style of the great straight roads in Italy which passed by the walled cities, which had to be accessed by smaller roads branching off from the main road. But these access roads are not less frequented nor more difficult to use than the main road. E. Guggenheimer (Berakhot loc. cit.) reads περίοδος, ἡ, “way around, circuit, circular path”. into public domain or from public domain into it¹⁰³The question of R. Eleazar is whether a circuitous road, of difficult use but public property and open for use by the public, nevertheless should be considered private property for the rules of the Sabbath.? He said to him, in your opinion a public domain does not exist. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, there is no public domain unless it be open from one end of the world to the other. The argument of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish seems inverted¹⁰⁴His first statement seems to imply that somewhere in the world there exists public domain. since he said, there is no public domain in this world, only in the future as it is written¹⁰⁵Is. 40:4., every valley will be lifted. A Mishnah¹⁰⁶Taharot 6:6. disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “What is a private domain? The paths of Bet-Gilgul¹⁰⁷In the definition of the Babli (22b), any road on which the carrier of a load cannot run; according to Rashi because of an incline, according to Maimonides because of obstacles in the road.. Private domain regarding the Sabbat¹⁰⁸Not really private domain but karmelit. but public domain for impurity¹⁰⁹A public domain for the rules of impurity, where cases of doubt may be disregarded, is any place accessible to the public, even if it is private property..”

¹¹⁰A parallel text is Sukkah 1:9. Since the reference to the rules of Sukkah is formulated there differently from here, the texts in their second parts are different versions, rather than straight copies. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose said it only for Tabernacles¹¹¹Mishnah Sukkah 1:10. The essence of a tabernacle is a temporary thatched roof, but it also needs at least three walls. According to the majority opinion the walls must start no more than 3 hand-breadths from the ground; R. Yose admits walls 10 hand-breadths wide hanging from the top., but in the matter of the Sabbath even Rebbi Yose agrees. The word of Rebbi Ḥanina implies that it is even for the Sabbath, as Rebbi Ḥanina said, a ruler came to Sepphoris and they suspended quilts¹¹²Sheets sewn together from rectangular pieces of cloth.; Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose permitted carrying under them following his father’s argument. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina comes like Rebbi Ḥanania and both disagree with Rebbi Joḥanan’s argument, as Rebbi Joḥanan¹¹³Obviously one has to read: R. Yose ben Ḥanina. said, Rebbi Jehudah, and Rebbi Yose, and Ḥanania bar Aqabia all three said the same. Rebbi Jehudah of the open bridges¹¹⁴Mishnah 9:5, where R. Jehudah defines the space under a bridge as private domain if the underpinning of the bridge structure extends 10 hand-breadths below the roadway., Rebbi Yose that of tabernacles, Rebbi Ḥanania ben Aqabia as it was stated¹¹⁵Šabbat 3, Notes 101–103; Babli 87b.: Rebbi Ḥanania permitted three things, he permitted a balcony, and seaweed¹¹⁶Reading עצה with the text in all parallel sources., and bringing bathtowels¹¹⁷Šabbat 22:5, Note 21..

¹¹⁸There exists a complete text of this difficult passage in the commentary of R. Ḥananel of Kairawan to the Babli, 88a. While this text obviously was written from memory and is influenced by Babylonian spelling, and the reproduction of the text in the Wilna Babli may give rise to some questions, it is a testimony predating the Leiden ms. by more than 250 years and shows that the emendations proposed by the standard commentaries have to be rejected summarily. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose¹¹⁹The version of R. Ḥananel, “R. Abba and R. Yose”, Amoraim of the last generation, is preferable to the Leiden text which quotes the third generation Amora R. Abbahu in the name of the fourth generation Tanna R. Yose (ben Ḥalafta), unless one wants to read “R. Yasa” in place of “R. Yose.”: This¹²⁰The statement of the Mishnah that if two balconies one above the other and both above the sea without eruv may not draw water. you are saying if they are using the hole. But if they are using the outside it is permitted¹²¹He seems to disagree with Rav Huna (Note 92) that for the laws of the Sabbath the balcony extends 3 hand-breadths beyond its actual width but allows the upper balcony to draw water through an appropriate hole if it extends in any way further than the lower balcony.. It was stated thus: If three balconies are one above the other¹²²Without common eruv. it is forbidden to pass from the upper one to the lower one passing by the middle one, but one may pass from the courtyard to the roof without worry¹²³In a multi-story house with a high atrium and several occupants without an eruv one may not lower anything from the top to the bottom through the airspace belonging to third parties. But outside the house from roof to courtyard there is no problem even if the house has more than one floor and no eruv was made inside.. Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac says, this¹²⁴The statement of the Mishnah (Note 120). you mean from the inside but from the outside it is forbidden¹²⁵Even with an eruv. If one refers the statement of R. Samuel bar Rav Isaac to R. Abbahu’s statement, one would have to read “permitted”. Since R. Ḥananel’s testimony makes emendation impossible, the statement has to refer even to a single balcony.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, both inside and outside are forbidden¹²⁶In the case of two balconies, inside use is forbidden without an eruv and outside in all cases,. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Zeˋira¹²⁷Tosephta 8:4.: “One lowers a pot with meat from a ledge which is ten [hand-breadths] high and four wide¹²⁸This defines a domain by itself but since it is not inhabitable it does not require an eruv. Since the ledge is outside the house, it contradicts both R. Samuel bar Rav Isaac and R. Zeˋira.. If a window of four hand-breadths was in between¹²⁹A window 4-by-4 wide and 4 deep is a domain by itself; the dish cannot be lowered through such a window. it is forbidden since one does not pass from one domain to another through a [third] domain.” What does Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac do with this? He explains it (if captive) [if equal]¹³¹Discussion of Mishnah 10..