Eiruvin 7 (3).pdfDaf 76
1) If you have a window between two courtyards; if it's completely above ten Tefachim from the ground, or even if it's within ten, but it's not four Tefachim squared, we don't consider it as an opening between courtyards and the courtyards must make their own Eiruv, and they can't make a joint Eiruv. However, if it's within ten Tefachim from the ground, even the slightest bit, and it's four Tefachim squared, they may make a joint Eiruv if they would like, but they can also make separate ones (since it's an opening, and not a breach in the wall). This is even according to the Rabanan of R' Shimon b. Gamliel who say the Shiur of Lavud is three Tefachim, they would agree that it's not a proper opening until it's wide four.
2) If the window is round, you need it to have a circumference of sixteen and four fifths Tefachim so that you would be able to fit a square that's four Tefachim squared inside it. you also need to have five sixth of a Tefach within ten to make sure that the four Tefachim squared area would be within ten Tefachim from the ground.
3) You only need the window to be within ten Tefachim between courtyards, but you can have it any hight in a house, even if it's a hole in the ceiling between two apartments, even if there is no ladder there; since we view the house as if it's filled (so every hight is within ten from the imaginary filling).
4) If you have a wall between two courtyards that's ten Tefachim tall and four Tefachim wide; both sides can climb it up to eat what's on it, but they can't carry up to it, nor carry down from it. [Tosfos says: according to R' Shimon even though all courtyards are one Reshus (and you can even carry from the other courtyard, and, of course, you can carry from on top of the wall); we're saying that you can't carry from the house to the top of the wall, or to carry from the wall into the house. However, to the Rabanan, it's forbidden to carry even to the courtyard. Although they agree that all courtyards are one Reshus, that's only if they didn't make an Eiruv. However, if they made an Eiruv, then the Rabanan held that you need to worry that they'll carry the utensils that rested in the house, that's now common to be in the courtyard, to the other courtyard.]
Daf 77
5) If the wall isn't four Tefachim wide; R' Yochanan allowed both courtyards to bring items up to the top of the wall and bring them down. After all, it's a Makam Patur where we allow both people from a Reshus Harabim and Reshus Hayachid to place items onto it. Rav held that it's forbidden between two courtyards, and it's not similar to a Makam Patur between a Reshus Hayachid and Reshus Harabim, since we need to be stricter here to give this rabbinical prohibition more gravity so people will take it more serious. [Tosfos says that we're only strict here between courtyards, but not if it's between a Reshus Hayachid and a Karmulas.]
6) If you have a wall between two courtyards; (since one courtyard was on higher ground than the second one), that was ten above the shorter one, and level to the ground of the higher one (i.e, not exactly ground level, but as long as it's not high ten facing them); you give it to the higher one to use (and they may carry on it, and not the people of the bottom one) since they can use it easily, and the others can only use it with difficulty (since they would need to lift the objects to a high place). [Tosfos explains: this is even according to R' Chisda who holds that the top courtyard can't carry there since they don't have a wall facing them that's ten Tefachim high, they can still carry from there courtyard onto the wall if it's within four Amos.]
7) If you have a trench between courtyards, and it's deep ten Tefachim to one courtyard,and it's on level ground to the second one (i.e, not exactly ground level, but as long as it's not deep ten facing them), we allow the one with the level ground to use it since they can use it easily, and the others can only use it with difficulty.
8) If the wall is ten Tefachim high on both sides, but one courtyard puts something to stand on next to the wall so that it wouldn't be ten Tefachim at that point; if it's wide four Tefachim, it's like a proper opening to the top of the wall (so they may use it). However, if it's not wide four, it's not an opening, and he doesn't have any right to the wall. However, if an area on the top of the wall has been knocked down (so that small area is not above ten), the people may use the area that got knocked down.
9) The item placed next to the wall (to stand on to make the wall below ten) needs to be something that can't be moved on Shabbos. Therefore, if it's a basin, it needs to have its sides buried under earth to the point that you can only remove it with a shovel or hoe. However, if it's not as entrenched, and you can remove it without a shovel, it doesn't make the wall as if it's less than ten, even if there is an inversed rim that's covered with dirt, and the only way to remove it will be moving the dirt, it's still something that can be moved on Shabbos since you're allowed to move the dirt indirectly. [Tosfos explains: we Paskin like R' Elazar b. Tudai that holds that way. Even the Rabanan who forbids moving indirectly only forbids in the case where a radish is buried with its top down, and there is a lot of dirt covering its thick part, and when you lift the thinner part, it will lift the dirt. However, they allow if the radish is buried top up, since the revealed area is thicker and it won't lift dirt. Although some dirt will shift, that's only classified as shaking off, but not a true moving.]
10) [Tosfos says: we only allow indirect moving if it's done for the sake of a non-Muktza item, but it's prohibited if done for a Muktza item. That's why we hold that you can't move a corpse that's in a bed by flipping it from one bed to the other until you come to the area you needed to leave it.]
11) A ladder on one side of the wall doesn't make it as if the wall is not ten Tefachim high if it only has three rungs, since it can be removed on Shabbos. However, a four rung ladder can make the top of the wall be considered to be within ten, despite that you may move the ladder on Shabbos, since such a heavy ladder is not usually moved. [Tosfos asks: it says in Mesechta Beitza that it's forbidden to move a ladder since people might suspect you that you're going to spread plaster on your roof. It's forbidden even if it's done in private according to Rav who says that, whatever is forbidden since people will suspect you for doing a sin is even forbidden if it's done in private. If so, why do we allow carrying the ladder here? R' Tam answers: we permit here small ladders that are usually used indoors, but bigger ladders that you use to get to the roof is forbidden. R' Avraham differentiates between Shabbos and Yom Tov. They only forbade carrying on Yom Tov since you can carry in the street. Therefore, once they need to forbid carrying it in the street since people see you, they also forbade it in your own property. However, since it's forbidden to carry in the street on Shabbos, it won't ever come to suspicion. Since there was no reason to forbid it because of suspicion, they allowed carrying it in your property.]
12) If there are two ladders on the two sides of the wall (and you want it to be like an opening from one courtyard to the other), if the thickness of the wall isn't four Tefachim wide, you need the ladders close to each other within three Tefachim (so that he can easily climb up one and go down the other). However, if it's four Tefachim wide, even if the ladders are further away, it's a proper opening since someone can walk across the top of the wall to get from ladder to ladder.
13) If you have multiple platforms next to the wall, if the bottom one is four Tefachim wide, it makes the hight of the wall below ten. Even if the bottom one is not four Tefachim wide, but it's within three Tefachim from the next one, and that's less than three from the one above it etc. and the top one is wide four Tefachim, it makes the height of the wall to be less than ten Tefachim.
14) The same applies by the "jumping ladder" [Rashi says that the ladders are like ours that have rungs that are unattached to each other. However, Tosfos argues: the ladder must be four Tefachim squared, but if they're less, then the ladder needs to reach the top of the wall, or, at least, to be within three Tefachim from the top; as we'll see an argument about this later. Therefore, Tosfos explains: they're stairs, but they're not attached in front, but there's a space between each stair.] If the bottom rung is four Tefachim wide, or even if it's not, but it's within three to the next rung etc. and the top one is wide four, it makes it like the top of the wall is within ten Tefachim.
Daf 78
15) If there is a protruding stone from the wall that's four Tefachim squared, you can make the height of the wall within ten by placing a ladder on this protruding stone. However, this is only if you place it directly on the stone, but if you place it next to the stone, it's only an extention to the stone's width (and not a passage to the top of the stone), and it doesn't help.
16) If the wall is nineteen Tefachim tall, you need one stone protrusion at the height of ten to make the top of the wall within ten. However, if it's twenty Tefachim high, (and is ten higher than the first protrusion), you need a second protrusion to allow the top of the wall. You need that the second protrusion to be within ten Tefachim of the first protrusion, and you also need it not to be directly on top of the first one, or else you can't place a ladder from one to the other.
18) Just like a well that's airspace between the walls are not four Tefachim, can be a Reshus Hayachid when you combine the thickness of the walls to make it four Tefachim wide (although you don't have four Tefachim of usable space on top of the well), since you can place a tray across its top and use it. So too, if this stand is lined completely with pegs, it's still a Reshus Hayachid because you can place a tray on it and use it.
19) Shmuel says that you need a fourteen Tefachim ladder for a ten Tefachim wall. R' Yosef holds that it could be thirteen Tefachim and a bit. Abaya says that it could be eleven Tefachim and a bit. [Rashi explains that the ladder needs to be placed four Tefachim away from the base of the wall and the rest is for the height of the wall. Shmuel holds that it needs to reach the top of the wall. Therefore, you need to distance the fourteen Tefachim ladder from the wall four Tefachim, and the remaining ten will reach the top of the wall. R' Yosef says the remaining nine and a bit Tefachim will reach within one Tefach to the top of the wall, and Abaya says that the remaining seven and a bit will reach within three Tefachim of the top of the wall, which is within Lavud.
However, Tosfos disagrees. After all, it will reach the top of the wall even if it's more than four away, since the hypotenuse is smaller than the two sides put together. Rather, Tosfos explains; that fourteen is the hypotenuse of a triangle that has ten Tefachim sides. As the rule is: you need to distance the ladder from the base the same height of the ladder. R' Yosef and Abaya weren't exact with their measurements, but just gave a sign that they need to distance it a Tefach from the top of the wall, or three Tefachim. However, R' Yosef really needs a ladder that's twelve and three fifths Tefachim, which is the hypotenuse of a triangle with sides that are nine, and Abaya needs a ladder that's nine and four fifths Tefachim, which is the hypotenuse of a triangle with sides that are seven.]
R' Huna b. R' Yehoshua says it's permitted with a seven Tefachim and a bit ladder since you can put it flush against the wall and it will be within three Tefachim from the top. (Although it's straight up and not easily climbed, but we see that they also allowed the platforms that are one on top of each other, which are not easily climbed either.)
20) R' Chiya says that logs of Bavel don't need to be attached to the ground to help, since their heaviness establishes their place. However, the ladders of Bavel [Tosfos: that don't have four rungs] don't help since they're moveable However, R' Oshiya holds that they help since their heaviness establishes their place. [Tosfos: however, if it has four rungs, there is no one who doesn't agree that their heaviness establishes their place.]
21) If the ladder isn't four Tefachim wide, if you combine a ladder of straw to make up for the width; if the straw ladder is in the middle, then it doesn't help since your foot (that ascends the middle of the ladder) can't climb up. However, if the wooden ladder is in the middle, and there are straw ladders on both sides, it helps since a person can ascend by having his feet step on the wood rungs.
22) If you compliment the ladder by engraving rungs into the side of the wall, you need the engraved rungs to be for ten Tefachim [Rashi: even if the wall is much higher. Tosfos explains: even though it's not within ten Tefachim from the top of the wall, we don't care that much (since there is a Chashuv amount of ten Tefachim that's engraved) and the ladder itself reaches the top of the wall. However, R' Tam explains the Gemara; you'll need to engrave until it's within ten Tefachim to the top of the wall.
Tosfos adds according to R' Yosef who holds that you can't have a ladder that's flushed against the wall (but you need to distance the bottom of the ladder from the base of the wall, so the engraving on the wall can't combine; we must refer to a slanty wall, so you can engrave next to the slanty ladder's rungs. Alternatively, it's in the corner of the courtyard and you engrave in the adjacent wall.]
23) If you completely engrave a ladder in the wall, since it's hard to climb it, you need it to be engraved all the way up the wall.
24) A tree that can be used as a ladder (but you're not allowed to climb it on Shabbos), or if the ladder is made from wood of a tree that was worshipped as an Avoda Zara (which is forbidden to have pleasure from, so you can't climb it); we can inquire if it can be used as an opening between two courtyards or not. After all, on one hand, you can't climb it to get over. On the other hand, it's a way to climb over, but you're prevented to go on it because of the prohibition, so it's like a lion laying by the opening (that doesn't destroy the opening, although it prevents anyone to come close to it). Rabbah says that the tree ladder is an opening since it's only a rabbinical prohibition preventing you from climbing over. However, the Avodah Zara ladder is an Issur from the Torah, so it's not an opening. R' Yochanan says that the Avoda Zara ladder is an opening, but not the tree. Since it's a Shabbos prohibition stopping you from climbing up, it can't be an opening for a Shabbos Halacha.
25) R' Nachman b. Yitzchok holds that a tree is dependant on the argument between Rebbi and his Rabanan whether you can do a rabbinical prohibition Bein Hashmashes (and you only need to have the ability to use the opening Bein Hashmashes when the Eiruv takes effect, and you don't need it to climb it the rest of the Shabbos). The Avodah Zara ladder is dependant on the argument between R' Yehuda and the Rabanan whether you can acquire an EIruv if placed on an object that's forbidden to have pleasure from. [Tosfos explains: he doesn't agree to the Gemara's second explanation there that even R' Yehuda holds that you can't acquire an EIruv if placed on an object that's forbidden to have pleasure from.]
26) If you have a trench between two courtyards that's ten Tefachim deep and four Tefachim wide, each courtyard can only make separate Eiruvs, but not a joint Eiruv. This is even if you fill the trench with straw. Although we consider a Mechitza of straw as a valid Mechitza, but it doesn't stuff up a trench. [Tosfos qualifies this that we refer to non-Muktza straw, or else it would stuff up the trench, as we'll see later. Although we say that if you have a pit in a Reshus Harabim that's filled with fruit and you throw an item in it, you're exempt from a Chatos since it stuffs it up and there are no Mechitzos, (but you're Chayiv if it's only filled with water); that's only when dealing with Torah law, but the rabbis considered it as stuffed. However, its still difficult since we'll compare this (shortly) to stuffing up a house regarding Tumah from the Torah.]
27) However, if you fill the trench with dirt, even without any intent how long you'll leave it there, it breaks the Mechitzos of the trench and you must make a joint Eiruv, and not separate Eiruvs. Even though a house full will dirt (that has a dead person in there) is not Batul there (and still makes objects Tamai that are in the house as if it's in an Ohel) until you decided to leave it there; R' Assi answers that's according to the Rabanan, but our Mishna holds like R' Yossi there who holds it's Batul even without intent to leave the dirt there. R' Huna b. R' Yehoshua answers; Shabbos is different than Tumah since even wallets are Batul there (since it's Muktza and can't be removed for Shabbos). R' Ashi says: houses are different than trenches, since it's common to fill up trenches (so you don't need specific intent to leave it there, since we can assume it). However, it's not common to fill up a house with dirt, so we can assume it's not going to be left there unless you have specific intent to do so.
Daf 79
28) If you place a board across the trench that's four Tefachim wide, it's like an opening and you can make a joint Eiruv, but if you want, you can make separate Eiruvs. However, (if it's long four Tefachim), and you attach it to the end of the trench, even if it only enters the slightest amount over the trench, it's an opening since it lessens the width of the gulf to less than four Tefachim, and it's easy to walk from one side to the other.
29) The same applies to two balconies across to each other [Ritva explains Rashi that they're across the street from each other. R' Akiva Eiger explains Rashi that it's on the same side]; you can make a joint Eiruv between them, but, if you want you can make it with one Eiruv. However, when it's not across to each other [Ritva: if it's diagonal from each other. R' Akiva Eiger: one stretches out further into the street than the other], you can't make a joint Eiruv. {R' Akiva Eiger asks: why can't you just walk across regularly where the balconies are equal? After all. it shouldn't ruin it just because it juts out further.} [Rashi holds that this refers to having a board connecting the two balconies so that you can walk from one to the other. R' Tam argues and says that if there is a board between them, it should combine the balconies even if they're on a diagonal. As we say that you don't need the ladders on both sides of the wall to be close to each other if the wall's four Tefachim wide since someone can walk from one ladder to another over that four Tefachim wide wall. Rather, we refer to a space less than four Tefachim. if they're across from each other, it's like any gulf that you can make one Eiruv if it's less than four. However, when it's at a diagonal and it's harder to walk across; even if it's less than four Tefachim, it's not easy to walk across.]
30) If you have a wall made out of a pile of straw between two courtyards, you can't make a joint Eiruv, but you must make separate Eiruvs. You can't take straw from the pile to your basket since you might take enough to lower the wall from ten Tefachim. Therefore, it's forbidden to hold your animal there to eat from the pile since you'll might take from it to your basket the same way that you can't hold it over grass that was uprooted on Shabbos (and is Muktza) since you might come to take the Muktza yourself. (However, you're allowed to hold the animal to eat from growing grass and we're not afraid that you'll come to uproot it yourself, since it's forbidden from the Torah, and people take it very serious.) However, you're allowed to stand in it's way to force it to go to the pile of straw, or uprooted grass, so that it will eat.
However, you're allowed to take from a pile of straw that's separating two houses. Since it has a roof, you can notice when it's getting too low, which is not true by a courtyard.
31) Even though a Mechitza that doesn't reach the ceiling are not Mechitzos [Tosfos: when it's a temporary type wall, like this straw]; Abaya answers: we must say we refer to a case where the roof is within thirteen Tefachim from the ceiling, and it's Lavud to the roof, so it's as if the Mechitza reaches the roof. R' Huna b. R' Yehoshua answers: it can refer to a ceiling that's ten Tefachim high and the straw wall is seven Tefachim and a bit that's Lavud to the ceiling. [Tosfos says: however, Abaya held that you need the Mechitza to be ten Tefachim tall, and not through Lavud. Granted that we usually allow a wall through Lavud, like we said the case in the first Perek of making a wall with three ropes within three Tefachim from each other and the ground (which would equal ten Tefachim counting the thickness of the ropes); but here, the same way that Mechitzos don't work if they don't reach the ceiling, they won't work if they're not ten Tefachim tall, even if it's ten with Lavud.]
32) If you have that wall of straw between houses that became less than ten Tefachim high, (and it must have happened before Shabbos to have this Halacha since we hold that new residents that come on Shabbos don't forbid the courtyard); the house needs to do Bitul to the rest of the courtyard, or lock the door (which would show that they're removing themselves from the courtyard and it's like Bitul). Other say that they need to do both, locking and Bitul. [Rashi holds that you need to lock your door by every Mevatel Reshus. It only needs to be locked when not in use, so you unlock it to get in or out, but you must lock it again after that. Tosfos asks: why didn't they decree to lock the door without Bitul since they might carry out? Tosfos answers: they only decreed by Bitul since everyone else is carrying, you'll come to carry out too. However, Tosfos main answer for Rashi: we're only afraid that you'll carry out and take back your Reshus and cancel the Bitul, (not that you'll carry when it's forbidden). However, this wouldn't fit well to R' Yehuda who holds that you only take back your Reshus if you carry out on purpose, and we shouldn't be worried that he's going to carry out when he knows it's forbidden.
Rather, Tosfos explains: we only need to worry here that he'll carry out since he was used to carrying there without an Eiruv, but you don't need to worry by a regular Bitul where they usually only carry there with an Eiruv. Also, this is only on the first Shabbos, but after that, since he already had one Shabbos that he didn't carry there, he's used to it and he doesn't need to lock up.]
33) The way that you make a Shituf; you place the barrel down and say that it's for all the people in the alley. You can have your adult children acquire it for others. [Tosfos says: there's an argument how to classify "an adult child." R' Yochanan says that it's not literal, but any child that supports himself is considered as an adult child in this case and can acquire for others. However, if he doesn't support himself, but is supported by his father, he is considered as "a minor child' in this aspect and can't acquire. However, Shmuel holds that it's literal and it all depends on the age of the child. However, Tosfos concludes, we Paskin like R' Yochanan when he argues on Shmuel.
However, a Jewish slave or maid, despite being supported by the master, they have their own hand to acquire since they're only being supported as part of their wages for working. The Ri goes a step further. He says that if he's supporting someone who is not his child, the supporter doesn't acquire all what that supported minor acquires. After all, they only decreed that by a son who he's constantly supporting, because only in that case will there be animosity for constantly supporting them and not getting anything in return. However, you acquire what your daughter (that's not a Bogeres) acquires even if you don't support her, since we don't want him to have any animosity with her, since he has the ability to marry her off to a disgusting person.] Also, you're Jewish slave and maid can acquire for all. [Tosfos explains: although the maid is still a minor, and usually a minor can't acquire for other people, but since this Shituf is only a rabbinical decree, they allowed this leniency.]
34) However, you can't have your minor child, or your non-Jewish slaves, to acquire it for others, since they're hands are like your hand, (and you can't acquire your own items for other people, since it never leaves your possession).
35) You can have your wife acquire it for others. [Tosfos brings the Gemara in Nedarim that we only refer to a case where she has her own house in the courtyard. Since usually the wife's hand is like the husband's, but since he needs to give it to her to acquire for herself so that it would work for her house, once she acquires for herself (since he can give her a gift), she can acquire at the same time for others. Although she's supported by her husband and the Eiruv is in the husband's house (where those who are supported by him usually don't need to contribute to the Eiruv), she still needs to contribute to the Eiruv, since he holds like R' Yehuda b. Bava who holds that supported wives need to contribute to the Eiruv and not slaves. Therefore, even if the slaves have their own house in the courtyard, they can't acquire for others since they don't need to acquire it for themselves.]
36) You need to lift the barrel a Tefach from the ground to acquire it for everyone. [Tosfos says; this is not a proof that, usually, you only need to lift items a Tefach to acquire them, since this might only be a leniency by Eiruv.]
37) Someone who makes Kiddush must taste a "cheeks' worth" of wine, or else he's not Yoitza. [Tosfos explains: that it's as much as it fills up one cheek (like the Gemara in Yuma says regarding being Chayiv for drinking on Yom Kippur). After all, wine that fills both cheeks is larger than a Revious, and you only need to drink this "cheeks' full" from a Revious.]
38) You're allowed to make a bonfire on Shabbos for a woman who just gave birth (since she's in danger if she gets too cold). Not only that, but even for a regular sick person. not only that, but even for someone who let blood; even during the summer.
39) Rav holds: we can assume that a tree was worshiped as an idol if the priests guard it and never eat its fruit. Shmuel says: those that they use their dates to make beer for a party during their holidays. The elders of Pumbadeisa held like Shmuel.
Daf 80
40) Rav says that you only need to acquire Eiruv T'chumim for other people, but not Eiruv Chatzeiros. Shmuel held the opposite; you only need to acquire Eiruv Chatzeiros and not Eiruv T'chumim. This comes out to also be a Tannaic argument. [Rashi and Tosfos explain; Rav holds that someone definitely decides to give over the portion of the Eiruv Chatzeiros to him (so we don't need an actual acquisition to show that he wants to) since the other people forbid him (and he's trying to allow himself to carry). Tosfos concludes: however, Shmuel who holds that you need an acquisition for Eiruv Chatzeiros is consistent to his opinion that it works as an acquisition. Not only that, but even according to Rabbah that he's showing that he's living in that house, he needs to make an acquisition on a share of that house. Alternatively, Shmuel holds, since one only makes an Eiruv T'chumim for a Mitzvah, he definitely decides to give over the portion so that he may fulfil the Mitzvah. Alternatively, since you need his permission to make an Eiruv T'chumim, when he says "acquire for me the Eiruv," we consider it as if the acquisition took place.]
41) [Tosfos concludes: there are some things that Eiruv Chatzeiros are more stringent than Eiruv T'chumim, like,according to Shmuel, you need to acquire it for others. Also, you only can use bread, which is not true by Eiruv T'chumim. However, there are things that Eiruv T'chumim is more stringent than Eiruv Chatzeiros, like you need two meals per person, and a minor can't carry out the Eiruv T'chumim, but an Eiruv Chatziros only needs the size of a dried fig for every person, and a minor can acquire it for other people.]
42) We Paskin that you need to acquire for both Eiruv T'chumim and Eiruv Chatzeiros. Also, you need to acquire for Eiruv Tavshilin. [Tosfos says that this is the Halacha.]
43) A wife can contribute to an Eiruv without her husband's consent, even if he's protesting. (The same applies to the wife of the non-Jew, that she can rent out his share.) However, this is only if he's the cause to forbid carrying (like he lives in that courtyard), or even if he doesn't, (like if he lives in an adjacent courtyard), but they are regular contributors to the Eiruv. However, regularly, she can't if they live in the adjacent courtyard. [Tosfos says that we only allow her to contribute his share, but she can't contribute more so others can acquire it. However, if he doesn't protest, perhaps she could contribute to the Eiruv even from one courtyard to the other. However, that's only by a wife, but we wouldn't let any other member of the household contribute unless the house owner explicitly allows.]
44) We force all the people in the alleyway to make a Lechi and Koreh (even when you can't force them to make an Eiruv) since it's a Mechitza. [Rashi says: since it closes off the alley, it makes it more secure. Tosfos explains: since the Lechi and Koreh works in all cases (to carry in the alley) so, we can force people to contribute for the public good. However, an Eiruv is either because of an acquisition or because of where you're living, and you can't force people to make acquisitions or to live someplace without their consent. Alternatively, it's a bigger necessity to allow carrying within the alleyway then to carry from your house to the courtyard.] (According to the Gra's text:) alternatively, you're allowed this since it could be forced in Beis Din.
45) Reish Lakish allowed a Koreh of wood from a tree that they worshipped as an idol (Asheira), and, of course, he would allow a Lechi of Asheira. R' Chiya b. Ashi allows only the Lechi and not the Koreh since you need a Shiur of a Tefach, and since the Asheira needs to be burned, we consider it as if it's burned and doesn't have the Shiur. [Tosfos says; although a Lechi also needs a Shiur of ten Tefachim high, we must say that since it's a very small Shiur, we don't care. Although we say that a Luluv of Asheira is considered as if its Shiur is destroyed although its Shiur is very small; we must say that they were more stringent by a Mitzvah. R' Avraham answers: even if you would burn the Lechi, you can still make it into a Lechi by gluing the ashes to the wall. Although we allowed a ladder of an Asheira, and a ladder needs to have a Shiur of four Tefachim wide; that's not a Shiur per se, but just to make the ladder easy to climb up. However, the rabbis required that a Koreh needs a Shiur Tefach to give it importance.]
46) If some of the food of an Eiruv gets lost or destroyed, you can add a little more from any food, whether it's from the original type of food or not, and you don't need to inform the other occupants what you're adding onto it. However, if all of it's lost, you can only add on from the original type of food that it was made of without informing the other residents, and not if you add another type of food.
47) However, if you want to have more people in the Eiruv, (like to combine with an adjacent courtyard), you need to inform the other residents. This is not only when it's a courtyard between two alleys that, if you make an Eiruv with one of them, you wouldn't be able to make an Eiruv with the second one; but even if it's one courtyard and one alleyway, you need to inform the residents if they're in favor to make a Shituf with this alley. This shows that the Rabanan argue with R' Yehuda who says that you can make an Eieruv Chatzeiros without someones consent. However, Shmuel at the end of the Perek says that everyone allows making a Shituf if there is only one alleyway without informing the other residents.
48) The Shiur for an Eiruv; if there are eighteen people in the Eiruv or more, you only need an Eiruv that consists of the size of eighteen dried figs, which is the size of two meals. However, if there are less than eighteen people, you just need a dried fig's size of bread from every participant.
49) This Shiur is only for the start of an Eiruv, but if you already had an Eiruv, but some got destroyed, you only need to add the smallest amount. After all, they only required a Eiruv Chatzeiros [Rashi: when you have a Shituf] so that you shouldn't forget the concept of Eiruv.
50) The Tanna Kama allows making an Eiruv Chatzeiros with any type of food except water and salt. However, R' Yehoshua says that you only can use complete loaves of bread. After all, if you use broken pieces, it will lead to animosity among people who contributed whole bread. Even if everyone in the courtyard wants to use broken pieces, it's still not valid. After all, eventually, it will return to the same problem (when someone contributes a whole loaf of bread).
Daf 81
51) If a piece was removed from the loaf for the Chalah of the bakers, which was one forty eighth of the dough, or if some Trumah fell in, and you took off the amount that you need to remove to give to the Kohain, which is one hundredth of the loaf, you may use the remainder of it for an Eiruv. [Tosfos says: this is only if it's missing because you actually removed the Chalah, but regularly, if any amount is removed for any other reason, it's not valid. Even when taking off Challah, it's only the exact Shiur, but not more. Although Trumah falling in is a smaller Shiur than Challah, so it shouldn't need to be mentioned since it should be a Kal V'chomer from Challah; still, I might say since the bread is fit for a Kohein to eat, it wasn't so necessary to remove that amount and the residents will be upset about it, so we're taught otherwise.] However, if a layman took off his Challah, which is one twenty-fourth of the dough, it's too much to be missing and people care about it (and it will lead to animosity), so it's not valid.
52) If a loaf broke, and you attached it together with a toothpick (by sticking each piece onto it so that it will look whole); if it's noticeable that it's broken and just stuck together, you can't make an Eiruv with it. However if it's not so noticeable, it can be used for an Eiruv
53) R' Zeira quoting Shmuel: you may make an Eiruv with rice or millet bread. Mar Ukva quotes Shmuel: you can only make it from rice bread, but not from millet.
54) You can make an Eiruv from lentil bread, but not from Ezekiel's bread, which is made from many types of random grains and other ingredients that's not only not fit for man, but not even for a dog.
55) The Chachumim say that someone can't just give money to a baker or grocer and say "acquire for me a share in the Eiruv." [Rashi says: even if he's having it lifted to acquire for others, it's not valid for this person who gave money. After all, they don't intend to give this as a gift to the money giver, like all other people who acquire an Eiruv for people, but to sell it to him with the money, and we hold that money can't acquire objects (until it's lifted). Tosfos says: even if the grocer intends to give it as a gift it's not valid since the money giver wants to acquire it with the money and not with this person's lifting. Therefore, since you can only make an Eiruv according to a persons consent, and he didn't consent to making the Eiruv in any other way besides acquiring through the money.]
56) This is only if he gives money, but if he gives a utensil as payment, it's valid since he can acquire the food through Chaliphin. Also, this is only if he says "acquire for me," but if he says "make an Eiruv for me," he's making him a Shliach (agent) to make an Eiruv and we have a Chazaka that an agent will do what he's sent to do. Also this is only to a baker or a grocer who sells bread, but if you give money and say "acquire for me" to a regular house owner the idea is to make him an agent to make an Eiruv regularly, therefore, the Eiruv is valid.
57) R' Eliezer says that the Eiruv is valid (even by a baker and grocer). (Although money usually doesn't acquire) the rabbis made it acquire by an Eiruv the same way they made it acquire meat during the four times a year, on Erev Yom Tov of the first days of Pesach, before Shvuos, before Shmini Atzeres, before Rosh Hashana. In Galil they included Erev Yom Kippur. [Tosfos says: however, before the first days of Sukkos, since we're so busy putting up a Sukka and buying a Lulov, we don't have that much time to Shecht much.] Therefore, if someone gives money for meat, it's as if they own the meat and the seller must Shecht a big animal even if he doesn't have that many customers. Also, if the animal dies, the buyer owns his share that he suffers the loss of it.
58) R' Shmuel b Yitzchok explains those four times during the year, not that the money acquires, but that; even if the buyer didn't pull the animal, but the seller had someone else pull it for him, he still acquires. In those four times, despite that the buyer never appointed this person as a Shliach to acquire for him, we consider it as a benefit for him, so someone can acquire it for him without his consent when it's his benefit. However, it might be detrimental the rest of the year since he might not want to spend the money for this meat.
59) R' Yochanan holds; money acquires objects from the Torah, but the Rabanan enacted that only pulling/lifting the object acquires it. During these four times of the year (when it's necessary to make a binding acquisition on the meat) the rabbis reverted it to the original torah Halacha that money acquires.
60) The reason they enacted that pulling the object acquires it, and not the giving of the money: since, otherwise, we're afraid that the seller who received the money (and is still holding onto the object) will claim that the buyer's grain was burned up (and since it's the buyer's loss, the seller doesn't have any incentive to save it). [Tosfos says: the reason why they enacted that only pulling acquires, and not requiring both pulling and money (and by that, not canceling the whole concept that money acquires); so that there shouldn't be a damper to trade to need two acquisitions for each purchase. The Rivan answers: then, if the buyer brings the items home before paying, if he has a fire, he'll tell the seller that it was his grains that got burnt.
The reason why we don't need to worry that, when the seller receives the money and the transaction didn't take effect, that he will tell the buyer that his money got burnt: since it's easy to save the money (we're not afraid that he'll be negligent not to save it just because it's not his yet). Alternatively, since the only way to guard money properly is to bury it, if he didn't and it got burnt, he's negligent in his guarding and he would need to pay anyways.]
61) [Tosfos concludes with an answer: although the reason why the seller is exempt from paying when guarding the buyer's grain since he's a voluntary watchman and he's exempt as long as he's not negligent; however, after this enactment, after he receives the money, he's considered like a "paid watchman" and would need to pay for the burnt money since he gains by having the ability to spend the money. The reason he's allowed to spend it now even though the transaction didn't take effect yet; since the money should be his already from the Torah that says that money makes the transaction.]
Daf 82
66) The Chachumim say that someone who gambles is invalid to be a witness since you don't acquire the money through an Asmachta (by something that you're taking a chance) and taking the money is stealing. R' Yehuda says that he's only invalid if he has no other trade (since he's not doing anything that's benefiting society) but not if he has another job since an Asmachta acquires. [Tosfos says: the Gemara in Sanhedrin Paskins like R' Yehuda. R' Tam explains: we only say that Asmachta acquires when it's completely in his hands to do (and he's not obligating himself anything extraordinary like a sharecropper making a condition that he'll pay the owner what he lost if he doesn't work the field, but he can't obligate himself to pay a thousand Dinars), or something that's completely chance. However, if it's something that's somewhat in one's hands but not completely, like in the case where a retailer makes a condition he'll pay the wine's owner if he doesn't completely sell all the wine, although he makes an effort to sell it but it takes people to buy from him to sell it, so that Asmachta is not binding. Alternatively, it's only not binding when it's done to just make someone to believe that you'll do something, like a borrower who paid back half tells his lender that he'll allow him to keep the loan document to collect in full if he doesn't complete payment by a certain day. Since it's only a one way deal, it's not binding. However, gamblers have the chance to win as they have a chance to lose, so, it's binding.]
67) [Tosfos explains: to make the bets binding, you need to make an acquisition on the money beforehand, or it's not binding. According to those who say that Asmachta doesn't acquire, the only way to make it acquire is by making an acquisition in a very important Beis Din. Therefore, if the gamblers are just keeping tabs how much everyone owes (without the money being there), the loser doesn't need to pay.]