Daf 61

1) R' Meir says: if someone lives with a non-Jew in a courtyard, or with a not completely religious Jew who doesn't agree to the concept of EIruv, he can't carry in that courtyard unless he rents the non-Jew's part in the courtyard. R' Elazar b. Yaakov says that the non-Jew doesn't forbid the Jew unless there is anyhow a second Jew there that forbids him and he needs to make an EIruv with him. In that case, he would also need to rent the non-Jew's share.

Daf 62

2) To explain this: everyone agrees that the non-Jew's living there, regarding this aspect, is not considered as if someone's living there. Therefore, everyone agrees that, if there is no Jew living in the courtyard, one can carry from one house to another, and into the courtyard. However, when the Jews are there, the rabbis enacted to rent out his share, and the non-Jew will refuse. After all, according to the opinion that you need to have a strong position in the renting [Rashi explains; that you'll be able to fill up the courtyard with furniture if you want. Tosfos explains: you need to make an official renting with writing up a legal document. R' Chananel explains that you need to rent to have the right to build there], the non-Jew will think that he's trying to take over the courtyard. Even according to the opinion that you only need to rent a weak position, still, he'll refuse since he's afraid you're trying to do this in order to place a hex on him through witchcraft. Therefore, since he wouldn't be able to carry there, the Jew will move out and wouldn't be left living with the non-Jew and he won't learn anymore from their deeds.

3) However, R' Elazar b. Yaakov holds that it's not common for a Jew to live with a non-Jew in the same courtyard without another Jew there, since the non-Jew is suspected of committing murder. Therefore, the rabbis never made decrees for uncommon occurrences. R' Meir says that, sometimes, people would end up living there by themselves, so they enacted in this case too. [Tosfos asks; since a Kusi is not suspected of committing murder, even according to the opinion they were "converts from lions" (and not real Jews), and people will live with them by themselves; why didn't R' Elazar b. Yaakov forbid the Jew who lives alone with the Kusi? Tosfos answers: still since the main enactment was for non-Jews, and they just included Kusim and Tzedokim (since they're somewhat comparable). Therefore, they won't be more stringent by the Kusi than by a non-Jew.]

4) You can rent from the non-Jew by giving him less than a Prutah, since non-Jews consider that an important amount. As we see that a non-Jew gets the death penalty for stealing less than a Prutah's worth, however he's not obligated to return it. [Rashi explains: the obligation to return stolen objects was only said by Jews. Therefore, he doesn't even need to return it if he stole it from a non-Jew. However, Tosfos says that he only doesn't need to return less than a Prutah to a Jew, since Jews don't consider it as real money. Therefore, he acquires it, and now, since it was used and is no longer here, he doesn't have to pay for it. However, if he stole a Prutah's worth, or he stole less than a Prutah from a non-Jew, he's obligated to return it.]

6) Shmuel says that the Halacha is like R' Elazar b. Yaakov (i.e., we Darshen to the public like R' Elazar b. Yaakov). R' Huna says that we're accustomed like R' Elazar b. Yaakov. (I.e., we don't Darshen it to the public, but if an individual asks a Shaila, you answer him like R' Elazar b. Yaakov.) R' Yochanan says the world does like R' Elazar b. Yaakov. (I.e., we don't Paskin like him, but if people do like him, we don't make them redo it the right way.) [Tosfos says; despite that we Paskin like R' Yochanan when he argues with Shmuel, the Halacha is like R' Elazar b. Yaakov. After all, the rule is the Halacha is like the most lenient opinion by Eiruv. Also, many other Amoraim Paskin like R' Elazar b. Yaakov.]

7) It's forbidden to Paskin before your Rebbi. [Tosfos qualifies it: this is only if there was a Shaila that came before you to Paskin L'maaseh (i.e., that someone will act upon it according to your P'sak). However, without an actual case (but you're discussing the Halacha), you may say your opinion.] It's even forbidden to Paskin that you may eat an egg with the milky dip Kutach. [Tosfos quote the Aruch to say that it can't be referring to such a simple case that a regular egg can be eaten with milk, since there is no ignoramus that doesn't know that. Rather we refer to a completed egg that was found in its Shechted mother. Although we're stringent not to eat the same completed egg if the mother was a Neviela, and we still say that it's like the meat; the Bahag explains, we're only lenient by milk and meat, since fowl and milk is only a rabbinical prohibition. Although, according to this, this P'sak is not too simple, (and the Gemara is trying to imply that it's the simplest P'sak, but you still can't Paskin it before your Rebbi), since there are opinions that fowl and milk is a Torah prohibition; still, they take it as a simple P'sak since the whole world is accustomed to be lenient. R' Tam differentiates that Neviela is in itself a prohibition, so we're more stringent than by fowl and milk, where each one starts out permitted, and you're trying to create a prohibition when mixing them together.]

8) Therefore, it's forbidden to Paskin in Megilas Taanis (that lists the days that you can't fast) before your Rebbi (even though it's the one item that was written down in the days of Chazal) just like you can't Paskin that an egg can be eaten with milk. [Rashi says to Paskin which day you can't fast. Tosfos asks: you can Paskin to forbid something, as we say later that, you can stop people from doing a prohibition. Rather Tosfos explains: he can't Paskin which days are permitted to eulogize. He concludes: these Halachos are only applicable in the earlier days, but they already canceled all the Yom Tovim in Megilas Taanis.]

9) [Tosfos sums up: a Talmid Chaver (that is on his level, but learned a few things from him), can Paskin outside three Parsos of his Rebbi, but not within three Parsos. However, a complete Talmid can't Paskin even outside three Parsos, but he's not Chayiv Misa unless he Paskins within three Parsos.]

10) [Tosfos says that it's only to Paskin a case where it's somewhat a Chiddush to the inquirer. However, things that are so simple to all, like that food remains Kosher when it absorbs Issur that is detrimental to its taste, he may Paskin before his Rebbi. Although they forbid showing a Shchita knife (for nicks) to a Talmid (although it's also simple); that's because they only enacted showing the knife to give honor and authority to the rabbi, so the Talmid can't show that authority before his Rebbi.]

Daf 63

11) Budding Talmidei Chachumim can inspect there own knives for their own use, but they can't inspect a butcher's knife that he wants to buy meat from.

12) Even when it's regularly permitted to Paskin, it's not permitted when someone (mistakenly) suggest to bring the question to the Rebbi, since it's disgraceful not to bring it to him at this point. Alternatively, if he's from the greatest rabbis of the generation, you also can't Paskin.

13) If to stop someone from doing a sin, you can stop him even if it's in front of your Rebbi, because when it comes to the honor of Heaven, we don't care of any other honor.

14) Anyone who gives all his Kahanic gifts to one Kohein brings hunger to the world.

15) As long as the Aron Hakodesh wasn't in its proper resting place, it's forbidden to have relations with your wife. [Tosfos explains: this refers to the main Aron that the intact Luchos was in, but it doesn't apply to the second Aron that the broken Luchos were in, which they regularly took out with them to battle. As we see that Dovid and Uriya was permitted to have relations then even though Urya said that the Aron wasn't in its place at the time, i.e., it was out by the battle. Although the Gemara in Bava Basra says that they were in the same Aron, that was only by the Beis Hamikdash, but not before. However the Yerushalmi brings an argument whether they had one or two Arons. Therefore, if they had one Aron, of course it wasn't out during the battle by Uriya (or they would be forbidden to have relations). However, since it was then not in a Mishkon or Mikdash, Uriya wanted to be stringent not to have relations with the combined fact that the Jews were still fighting.]

16) If there is a non-Jew in the alleyway that doesn't want to rent out his share; Abaya suggested that all the people should Mevatel their share to one resident, and he'll be considered one person with the non-Jew, which is permitted. Although it's common for people to live this way with a non-Jew (since there are enough people around that will prevent the non-Jew from killing him; still, it's uncommon for everyone to Mevatel their Reshus to one person, it remains an uncommon occurence that the rabbis didn't enact.

17) [Rashi holds that they can't make an Eiruv even among the courtyard (where Jews only live) since they might end up carrying items that rested at the beginning of Shabbos in the house into the alleyway. As this is the position of Rav who Paskins like R' Shimon that you may carry from a roof to a courtyard, or to a Kafeif, or from a courtyard to a Karfeif, or vice versa, only if the courtyards didn't make an Eiruv, or else you might take objects that rested in the house into another Reshus. However, Tosfos says that we don't Paskin like Rav, but it's even permitted if they made and Eiruv and we're not worried that they'll carry out objects to another courtyard that rested in a house. However, only the one that they Mevatel their Reshus to may carry out from their house (once they made an Eiruv together), but not the other residents since it would look like they're taking back their Reshus.]

18) [Tosfos concludes: even though they all make an Eiruv, they're not considered as one household to be considered as one household with a non-Jew as it would be permitted if they actually all lived in the same house. This is like we see that, if someone forgot to join the Eiruv, they must be Mevatel to all the residents, and we don't say that he only needs to Mevatel to one since they're all considered one household through the Eiruv.]

Daf 64

19) Rava says that you can't do that, since people who live in that alleyway will forget about the laws of an Eiruv. Even if you require them to also make an EIruv, they will think that an Eiruv takes effect even when there is a non-Jew there. It won't help to announce the difference here why it's permitted, because that won't help for the children who will grow up thinking that it helps. Rather, there is no other solution but for one of them to get close to the non-Jew and borrow the right to use his property, and then he'll get the status like his hired hand (and it will help to make an Eiruv with this Jew).

20) [Rashi says: if you have two houses that are open to each other, one house owner can Mevatel his house to the other house owner to allow carrying from one house to the other. However, Ri says that you can't do it, since there is no downside to this Bitul (since they both can carry from one house to another), so, there will be no reason to make an actual Eiruv and they'll come to forget about making an Eiruv and they might come to forget and carry without making the Bitul. (See Mahrsha why Tosfos changed from the simple meaning). After all, we can't say that the Mevatel can't carry from his house to his friend's house just like the one who Mevatel his courtyard can't carry there from his house, since there, where he still retains Reshus in his own house, it looks as if he's taking back his property. However, here, where the owner gives up all rights for his property, he never looks as if he's taking back his Reshus since he's not carrying from his Reshus. By the courtyard, even if he also Mevatels his house, he's, at least, carrying into a Reshus he once owned. However, here, he's carrying into the other persons house that he never owned. Rather, he needs to leave out some rooms from the Bitul so that he's losing something for not making an Eiruv, and it will incentivize to make an Eiruv. However, we can say that Rashi held that if the Mevatel carries from his house to the other house, and then carries those objects back into his Reshus, it looks as if he's reclaiming his house and cancels the Bitul. Therefore, he will gain by making an Eiruv.]

21) Although we consider a hired hand, or someone who's hired to harvest (that lives by the non-Jew) as the owner if it's a leniency (and if they contribute to the Eiruv, you don't need to rent from the nonJew). However, we don't consider them as the owners to be stringent. Therefore, if they live in private rooms and one forgets to give an Eiruv, he doesn't need to Mevatel his share.

22) If you drink a Revious of wine, you shouldn't Paskin.

23) If you drink a Revious of wine, you can't Daven. However, if you Davened, you're Yoitza as long as you're able to speak before a king. However, if you can't speak before a king, your Davening is an abomination. [Tosfos explains: therefore, you're not Yoitza like you're not Yoitza when you Daven next to dung. However, you can't completely compare it to dung, since it's not simple that you're Yoitza Brachos next to dung, but you can make Brachos drunk. However, even if you say Brachos are like Davening regarding dung, you're Yoitza by saying Brachos next to urine, since it is only rabbinically prohibited and more lenient than dung, as we see; they didn't forbid Davening when it's a Safeik if the urine is there.]

24) If he walks a Mil, or sleeps a little, it will wear off the wine he drank. However, that's only when he drank a Revious, but if he drank more, the walk will make him have a more unclear head and the sleep will make him more intoxicated. However, this is only if he walks himself, but if he travels on a donkey for three Mil, the wine will wear off even if he drank more than a Revious.

25) You're not allowed to pass over food if you chance upon it. However, that's only in the olden days, but these days, where the Jewish girls are into witchcraft, you leave it alone because there may be a hex over it. However, you only need to worry about a hex on a whole loaf and not on pieces.

26) R' Gamliel found bread on the way. He told his student, R' Ilay, to take it and give it to a non-Jew. After all, we assume it fell from someone who is part of the majority of passerbyers, and most are non-Jews. Therefore, they couldn't eat it themselves since we assume it to be Pas Akum. Even though it was right after Pesach, and we should assume that it was Chametz that was around during Pesach, we Paskin that non-Jew's Chametz is permitted after Pesach. [Tosfos explains: R' Gamliel was allowed to give it to a non-Jew and it's not prohibited because of the lav not to give gifts to non-Jews. We must say he doesn't agree to that Drasha of Lo Sichaneim (and it only forbids you giving them land in Eretz Yisrael). Alternatively, since he's walking with them on this journey, it's like he sold it to him (since it's in order to keep on good terms with him, so he was receiving something for it.) Alternatively, since we feed the non-Jewish poor along with the Jewish poor because of keeping the peace, here, it's also keeping the peace.]

27) There is an argument whether Chachumim can open session on "uprooting an oath" by the person regretting he made the oath. [Rashi explains that if the Chachum needs to open up an excuse for him to say "would you have made the oath if you would know that you would regret it?" Or, you don't even have to do as much, but just by the person saying that he regrets the oath will automatically uproot the oath. However, Tosfos explains that if it's between whether the Chachum can open up saying "would you have made the oath if you would know that you would regret it?" Or does he need a real opening that; "would you have made the oath if you would know a certain fact that you didn't realize then" and not just that you'll eventually regret it.]

28) According to the more stringent opinion, the Chachum needs to be sitting to permit the oath since it takes more to permit it, so it must be taken more serious and not on the run. However, the more lenient opinion allows permitting the oath while walking, riding or standing up.

Daf 65

29) A drunk is obligated to do all Mitzvos, his business deals are binding and he gets all punishments in Beis Din for committing a sin. However, he's exempt from Davening. This is only if he didn't reach the point that he was as drunk as Lot, but when he reaches that point, he's exempt from everything.

30) R' Sheishes, when he drank, he would sleep (to wear off the wine) and left it to his attendant to wake him shortly (so that he can Daven). R' Yochanan agreed to R' Sheishes and Chananya disagreed. [Rashi explains Chananya that he needs to wake up himself. Tosfos adds even if he'll miss the time of Davening because of it. However, it seems to be that the Halacha is like R' Sheishes.]

31) Shmuel didn't Daven in a place where they held beer (since the smell bothered him), and R' Pappa didn't Daven in a place that had fish.

32) Night was created to sleep [Tosfos: during the summer nights during Tamuz that are short] and the moon was only created to learn by [during the longer nights].

33) R' Acha b. Yaakov had a certain amount to learn each day, and if he had some other thing that he needed to do that day and he didn't finish his quota by day, he finished it at night.

34) If you have one courtyard within another (and the inner one needs to pass through the outer one to get to the street), and a Jew and a non-Jew live in the inner one, and another Jew in the outer one, Rav forbids to carry in the outer one. This is even according to R' Elazar b. Yaakov that needs two Jews together in the courtyard before the non-Jew forbids them, we consider them to be together in the outer courtyard like R' Akiva who says that, even if the inner courtyard may carry by themselves in their courtyard, they still forbid the outer courtyard since they have the right to pass through it. However, the inner person can carry in his courtyard since he's a single resident with a non-Jew. [Tosfos explains: although it's normal to live with a non-Jew in this case, since he's not afraid for his life since there is a Jew in the outer courtyard; still, the rabbis didn't differentiate and permits all single person with a non-Jew (even if there's a case where he can be comfortable to live with the non-Jew).]

35) R' Elazar inquired from Rav: what would be a case if one Jew is in the inner courtyard and a non-Jew and Jew in the outer. After all, perhaps, only in the first case do they live without fear since the non-Jew can't say that the Jew he lived with left by himself, since the outer courtyard Jew would claim that he would have noticed him leaving, and they'll investigate. However, here, the non-Jew can say that the Jew in the outer courtyard left, and the Jew in the inner courtyard can't contradict him. [Tosfos explains: you can't say that the rabbis didn't differentiate and forbid here since it has the status of two Jews living together even though he fears living in the outer courtyard, since we only say that they didn't differentiate when there is a leniency and not when it's a stringency.] Rav answers: that the non-Jew is still scared to kill the outer Jew, since the inner Jew could pass by at any time.

36) If the non-Jew living in the courtyard rented it from another non-Jew, and the non jewish renter is not there for the Jews to rent his share from him, [Tosfos adds: and there is no members of the household that can rent it out, as if there was a member, they could rent it out from him since they're no worse than a live-in worker], he may rent it form the original owner as long as he has the legal right to remove the renter. However, if he has no legal right, then he has no ownership to the use of the house (and he can't rent it to you).

37) [Rashi: this is only applicable if the non-Jew comes in middle of Shabbos, Tosfos; however, if he doesn't return, then we Paskin like R' Yehuda who says that a non-Jew that spends Shabbos in a different area doesn't forbid them.]

38) If you have a Safeik in these Halachos, and there is no rabbis to ask now, you can be lenient in this case until you get to a proper rabbi to ask since its a Safeik Drabanan.

39) If the non-Jew comes on Shabbos, R' Yochanan allows to rent it from him on Shabbos. [Tosfos says that this is not similar to doing business on Shabbos, since it's more similar to giving a gift since it's only done to allow carrying, and it's not a true business deal.

Tosfos explains; although they made an Eiruv before the non-Jew came, the Eiruv is now Batul, and they need to Mevatul their share to one person. This is not similar to two boats tied together that they made an Eiruv between them; if they become untied, and then gets retied, the original Eiruv goes back into effect. After all, the Eiruv there was not predestined to become Batul. However, here, since the non-Jew is returning on Shabbos, it was predestined to be Batul, so, the Eiruv can't remain in effect after the renting. This is also the reason we don't say that, since it was permitted when Shabbos started, it should remain permitted for the whole Shabbos. (The Maharam Merutunburg deduces from here that, if you made an Eiruv with someone that's close to death, it's not an Eiruv, since it's bound to be broken since he is predestined to die on Shabbos and the Eiruv will be Batul).]

40) [Tosfos asks: why do they need to rent it out? After all, since they need to Mevatel to one, Mevatel without renting and they'll be a single household with a non-Jew, which is permitted. As, Rava earlier only was against this since the non-Jew was unwilling to rent it, they would never have an Eiruv, but here he's willing to rent it, so they'll have an Eiruv next week.

Tosfos answers: we don't make the Bitul permitted from the non-Jew's word that he's willing to rent it out. After all, we won't make something kosher just by a non-Jew telling us so. Alternatively, this is R' Yochanan consistent to his opinion that we're accustomed to do like R' Elazar b. Yaakov, but he holds the main opinion is like R' Meir that a single person by a non-Jew is also forbidden. However, the truth is, according to us who hold that the Halacha is like R' Elazar b. Yaakov, we would permit here without renting it out.]

Daf 66

41) R' Yochanan compares renting to Eiruv. Just like you can make an Eiruv with food that's worth less than a Prutah, and you can have a live-in worker give an Eiruv for the house, and when one person of a courtyard, who originally made an Eiruv with the others in his courtyard, gives for an Eiruv in another courtyard, he's giving on behalf of everyone else in his original Eiruv; so too by renting. You can rent with less than a Prutah's worth, you can rent from a live-in worker, and one person from the Eiruv rents from the non-Jew, he's renting on behalf of all the Jews.

42) Shmuel argues and says that Bitul doesn't help if you can't Mevatel from before Shabbos, (so the residents can't Mevatel to one of their own after the non-Jew shows up). [R' Chananel Paskins like R' Yochanan, since we always Paskin like him against Shmuel. However, Ri Paskins like Shmuel since we find other Amorayim who hold like him. Like we see later that, if non-Jews surround a portion of a Reshus Harabim with walls, the Jews that have houses open to it can't carry in it by Mevateling it to one member, since they couldn't Mevatel it from before Shabbos.]

43) [Tosfos says: this, that R' Yochanan says that it's enough for the worker of the non-Jew to contribute to the Eiruv even if you don't rent from the non-Jew; yet in the Yerushalmi, R' Yochanan says that, if a Jew and non-Jew lives in the same house, you need both, an Eiruv from the Jew and rent from the non-Jew; we must say that refers to them being equal partners in the house, and the Jew is not just a worker. Alternatively, we refer to a case where the Jew has a private room in the house that the non-Jew can't enter.]

44) Shmuel says that there is no Bitul Rishus from one courtyard to another. Nor can you Mevatel in a desolated house (like if that house was open to two residential houses). After all, they only allowed Bitul in the same courtyard, since it's the main area that the people use for living space, plus, they forbid each other if they didn't make an Eiruv together.

45) R' Yochanan says that there is Bitul from one courtyard to another, and you can make Bitul in a desolate house.

46) Abaya says that Shmuel admits when you have one courtyard within another, that you can make a Bitul from one to another. After all, the reason why he regularly says that they can't Mevatel from one courtyard to another is; since they don't forbid on each other, but here, where the inner one forbids the people of the outer one (if the people of the inner ones can't carry) since they have the right to pass through them.

47) Rava holds, even so, you can't be Mevatel Reshus from one courtyard to another. The only way that you can be Mevatel from one courtyard to another if one of the people in the outer courtyard forgot to contribute to the Eiruv, the people of the inner courtyard can close the door to the outer one (and R' Akiva holds that the people of the outer courtyard need to Mevatel their Reshus to the inner one), since they can say that we only partnered with you to gain, and not for you to mess us up.

48) [Tosfos explains: of course, in all cases, the people of the inner courtyard can Mevatel their Reshus to one of their residents and he can carry out. We're just saying there is no way for there to remain an Eiruv.]

49) [Tosfos also says: It's also not similar to what we say by three courtyards that the people of the outer ones made an Eiruv with the people of the inner one, but the people of the outer ones didn't make an Eiruv with each other, that R' Tam holds that the inner people are forbidden with the outer ones, and yet the people of the outer ones are not forbidden. That's because the people of the inner one can carry in its own courtyard (although they can't carry to the outer ones), but the people of the inner one here is forbidden to carry in their own courtyard because of the people of the outer courtyard.]

Daf 67

50) [Tosfos says: although we usually say that we don't consider that people that made an Eiruv as living in that courtyard when it's a stringency, but only when it's a leniency, that which we consider the outer ones living in the inner ones and forbid them although it's a stringency to forbid them without Bitul when one of the inner people forget to contribute to the Eiruv; that's because he was negligent. Thus, when someone is negligent, we even consider it as if they live there when it's a stringency.]

51) If one of the inner people forgot to make an Eiruv; according to R' Eliezer who holds that you don't need to Mevatel to every person, but only to one, the one who forgot may Mevatel to one of the inner people (and he doesn't need to Mevatel from one courtyard to the other), and then it's considered Mevutal to all the people in the Eiruv, even those in the outer courtyard and they're permitted. [Tosfos says: but it can't work the other way around, that if one of the outer courtyard people forgot, they can't just Mevatel to one of the other people in the outer courtyard and it would be considered as if he was Mevatel to everyone, even to those who live in the inner courtyard. Only by the inner courtyard, where they're only forbidden from the outer courtyard because of the Eiruv, the Bitul to one person is considered as automatically Mevutal to the outer courtyard. However, since the inner courtyard have the right to walk through the outer one, which forbids them even without the Eiruv, we don't consider that it's automatically Mevutal to the inner ones, and is considered as if they Mevatel from one courtyard to another.] However, according to the Rabanan who say that you need to Mevatel to each person of the Eiruv, even though the one who forgot to contribute to the Eiruv Mevatels to his friends in the inner courtyard, he needs to Mevatel to the people of the outer one too (and he can't since it's from one courtyard to another).

52) If you have two houses on the opposite side of the street, and non-Jews build a wall to enclose the area between them on Shabbos, one can't Mevatel his Reshus to the other in order to allow carrying in the enclosed area. This is not only according to the opinion who says that you can't Mevatel from one courtyard to another. (After all, it's worse than two courtyards. Not only did one not forbid his friend in this area coming into Shabbos like by two courtyards, since there was no enclosed area there from before Shabbos, but it would be impossible to make an Eiruv between them, which they could have done by the two courtyards.) However, this is even true according to the opinion that you can Mevatel from one courtyard to the other. After all, they only allow the Bitul by two courtyards since they could have made an Eiruv before Shabbos, but not in this new enclosure that they couldn't make an Eiruv before Shabbos.

53) If the non-Jew dies in middle of Shabbos [Rashi: even if he was there from before Shabbos]; according to the opinion that you can rent from a non-Jew and then Mevatel, you can, of course, just Mevatel here. The only question is to the opinion that you can't rent and Mevatel, but, perhaps, you can Mevatel without renting. R' Sheishes permits it [Rashi: since he could have made an Eiruv and rent before Shabbos, so it's not similar to the case earlier where the non-Jew wasn't there earlier to rent it from.]. R' Hamnuna held that it's forbidden [since you can't make an Eiruv before Shabbos without renting. Tosfos argues since the Gemara earlier implies that they only forbade there since the non-Jew came on Shabbos and they couldn't rent before Shabbos, but if he was there before Shabbos, but they didn't rent before Shabbos, everyone would agree that you can rent and Mevatel on Shabbos. Rather, Tosfos explains: the non-Jew came on Shabbos and died on Shabbos. Therefore, it doesn't work when the non-Jew is around and you need to rent and Mevatel, but when he dies and you only need to Mevatel, R' Sheishes holds that you can be Mevatel. This is not similar to what we don't allow Bitul by an enclosure made by non-Jews on Shabbos since there you couldn't make an Eiruv at all before Shabbos. However, here, where the courtyard is around before Shabbos and an Eiruv helps until the non-Jew shows up, you can Mevatel afterwards. R' Hamnuna holds that you can't Mevatel the same way that you can't rent and Mevatel.]

54) If a non-Jew that has and opening to the alleyway also has an opening that's four Tefachim squared to a valley, he doesn't forbid the people in the alley even without renting, since he's very happy to use his private opening since he has a lot of private space there. This is even true if he's bringing in camels and wagons the whole day through the alleyway.

55) If the extra opening is open to a Karfeif; if it's a Beis Sasayim, he forbids the Jews of the alleyway since the private opening is too little space. If it's more than a Beis Sasayim, then he doesn't forbid on the Jews since he has ample private space.

56) If you have a Jew in the alleyway that didn't contribute to the Shituf, if he's open to a Karfeif that's a Beis Sasayim, he doesn't forbid the others since he still has a private area that he can carry in. However, if it's more than a Beis Sasayim, since he can't carry in that private area, he needs the alleyway, so he forbids on the other Jews.

57) [Tosfos says: if the Karfeif that's more than a Bais Sasayim was enclosed for people to live there; Rashi says that the Jew doesn't forbid since he can carry in that area. However, Tosfos says: since it's enclosed to live in, it's considered part of your house and it doesn't compensate not having an alley.]

58) If someone throws an item from a Reshus Harabim to a Karfeif that's more than a Beis Sasayim and not enclosed to live in, he's Chayiv. After all, it's a true Reshus Hayachid, and the rabbis only decreed not to carry in it since it doesn't have people living there (it doesn't look like such a Reshus Hayachid).

59) R' Ashi says: even though it's a Reshus Hayachid from the Torah, you may carry from it into the sea, (which is a Karmulas), within four Amos. Although he's carrying from a Reshus Hayachid from the Torah into a Karmulas, but they felt that this is better, because, if we forbid it, they'll assume it to be a real Reshus Hayachid and they'll come to carry throughout the Karfeif. Since the rabbis made the Halachos of Karmulas, they can say when it's permitted and when it's forbidden. They thought it's better to be careful that they shouldn't come to carry throughout the Karmulas since it's more common, than to forbid carrying from the Karfeif to the sea since it's uncommon. [Tosfos says: therefore, R' Tam permits to carry from a garden to a Karmulas as long as it's not a complete Reshus Harabim, and we don't say that they only allow by a sea that's very uncommon. After all, the reason to prevent carrying in the whole Karfeif applies here too. Also, we see that the Gemara in the beginning of Shabbos, when counting the four different Reshus, doesn't differentiate between different Karmulas, or else it would be five Reshuyos.]

60) If a rabbi gives a P'sak that's applicable to a Torah law, if a student has a question on it, he first needs to ask before they act on the P'sak. However, if it's only a rabbinical law, you first do the act, and then ask the question.

61) There was a baby boy on his eighth day [Tosfos: i.e., before the Milah, similar to what we compare it later to sprinkling the Parah Aduma water to bring the Korban Pesach, that it's done before bringing the Korban]; that the hot water that was designated to wash him after the Milah spilled, and they didn't make an Eiruv in the courtyard, so they can't bring water from another house. [However, if the water spilled after the Milah, where refraining from washing him with hot water is dangerous, anyone who runs and gets hot water in any manner is praised.] R' Yosef said to rely on the Shituf in the alleyway to carry in the courtyard. [Tosfos says although we Paskin later on like R' Meir who requires them to make both an Eiruv and a Shituf to carry in the courtyard and alley; perhaps he holds like R' Yochanan who holds that it's only the custom to do like R' Meir, but we really hold like the Rabanan who say that one of the two can help you carry in the courtyard. Alternatively, he holds like the opinion that we Paskin like R' Meir only if they didn't make the Shituf with bread, but if they made it with bread, it works to allow carrying in the courtyard without an Eiruv.]

Then it was revealed that they didn't make a Shituf either. So, R' Yosef allowed bringing the water with a non-Jew. Although they didn't allow you to transgress the rabbinical prohibition to get sprinkled by the Parah Aduma water on Shabbos in order to bring your Korban Pesach, that's because you need to actively transgress the rabbinical prohibition. However, here, you only passively transgress the rabbinical prohibition of telling a non-Jew to do a Melacha, they allowed it in order to do the Milah.

Daf 68

62) If you don't want to distribute the Eiruv to other members of the courtyard when they ask you for it, it's not a valid Eiruv. [Tosfos says: therefore, you shouldn't make an Eiruv with food that you need for Shabbos or that is very expensive, since you'll refrain giving it up if someone asks you for it.]

63) [Tosfos says: we Paskin like R' Yehoshua who says that you need to make an Eiruv with bread only, but you can make a Shituf for an alleyway with any food. You need to put an Eiruv in a house, and the Shituf in the courtyard.]

64) Abaya says that you can't make a Shituf with food stored away (that they partake in, since they might be taking from the Shituf {since we don't know which exact pieces of food was designated for the Shituf}, and it will be gone by the next Shabbos). R' Oshiya says that it's an argument between Braisos. He reconciles them by saying that Beis Shammai holds that you can't, since you need to come on to Breira to say that, what was consume, was not the Shituf, and they don't hold on relying on Breira. However, Beis Hillel holds of Breira, so they hold it to be a good Shituf. As we see that a corpse in a house makes all the entrances Tamai until you decide which opening you'll carry it out, and then only that entrance is Tamai. Beis Shammai says that you must make the decision before the man died, but you can't make the decision afterwards and say that it was as if it was retroactively decided before he died. Beis Hillel says they're Tahor even if you decide it after he died. [Tosfos explains: however, Abaya held that there are many Tannaim who argue with Breira, so the ones who don't hold of Breira held that Beis Hillel doesn't hold of Breira, and this argument never happened. Alternatively, they argue whether his decision will make the other entrances Tahor from now on, or not; but everyone agrees that it doesn't make them Tahor retroactively.]

65) [Tosfos quotes R' Menachem from Vien who learns the Sugya as follows: even according to R' Oshiya, Beis Hillel only holds that it only makes the other entrances Tahor from now on, or not; but no one holds it makes Tahor retroactively. However, according to Beis Shammai, who needs the decision to be made when the man was alive, or else he needs to do an action (to fix the opening to help carrying out the dead) to make it Tahor from now on, would also need the Shituf to be put in the barrel for the sake of being a Shituf. Beis Hillel, who allows the decision to be done after the man dies, will hold that you don't need to put the Shituf in the barrel for the sake of being a Shituf, but you can designate the wine that's already in a barrel for the Shituf later. However, Tosfos concludes: it's difficult to compare the decision of taking out the dead to the decision of making a Shituf.]

66) Rava holds: if the hot water for the Milah spills, you can ask the mother if she needs hot water, and if she does, you can have a non-Jew cook up water for the mother, and the leftovers may be used for the Milah [Rashi: but a Jew can't cook for the mother, since a Jew can't be Mechalel Shabbos for her after seven days from the birth, since she's no longer in mortal danger.] Even if the mother is sitting around eating dates (and seems healthy) and doesn't seem to need any special service perhaps she's has a certain condition that she eats, and doesn't know what's she's eating.