MISHNAH. IF FIVE COMPANIES SPENT
THE SABBATH IN ONE HALL EACH COMPANY, BETH SHAMMAI RULED, MUST CONTRIBUTE
SEPARATELY TO THE ERUB; BUT BETH HILLEL RULED: ALL OF THEM CONTRIBUTE TO THE
‘ERUB ONLY ONE SHARE.
THEY AGREE, HOWEVER, THAT WHERE
SOME OF THEM OCCUPY ROOMS OR UPPER CHAMBERS A SEPARATE CONTRIBUTION TO THE
‘ERUB MUST BE MADE FOR EACH COMPANY.
The Hall described is a kind of hotel, where each room is
part of the whole but has its own partitions and door out to the courtyard.
The dispute between Hillel and Shammai is unclear and is
discussed thoughout the page. Is it a question of the size of partition for
each room? R. Nachaman imagines the partitions as being mere stakes in the
floor. R. Hiyya and R. Simeon imagine the difference between partitions which
reach almost, but not quite, to the ceiling.
Is the contribution one for each room, or one for each
individual? Or is this an issue of transfer?
A Tanna taught: This applies only
where their ‘erub is carried into a place other [than the hall]. But if their
‘erub is remaining with them all agree that one contribution to the ‘erub
suffices for all of them.
This is seen as Hillel’s position.
Others read: This applies only where
the ‘erub remained with them, but if they carried their ‘erub to a place other
[than their hall] all agree that a separate contribution to the ‘erub is
required for each company.
Whose view is followed in which was taught: If
five residents who collected their contributions to an ‘erub desired to
transfer it to another place one ‘erub suffices for all of them? — Whose view?
No one's.
Let’s hear it for “no one” !
No comments:
Post a Comment