Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Shabbath

Folio 7a

E.g., when it has barriers,¹  and [this is] in accordance with the following dictum of 'Ulla in R. Johanan's name: An enclosure more than two se'ahs [in area]²  which is not enclosed in attachment to a dwelling place,³  even if it is a kor or two kor [in area],⁴  if one throws [an article] therein [from public ground] he is liable. What is the reason? It is a partitioned area, but it lacks inhabitants.⁵  Now, as for R. Ashi, it is well that he does not explain it as 'Ulla;⁶  but why does 'Ulla not explain it in accordance with his own dictum? — He answers you: if it has barriers, is it called a plain: [surely] it is an enclosure! And R. Ashi?⁷ — 'Private ground' is taught.⁸

'And a karmelith.' Are then all these [sea, plain and colonnade] too not karmelith? — When R. Dimi came,⁹  he said in the name of R. Johanan: This is necessary only in respect of a corner near a street:¹⁰  though the masses sometimes press and overflow therein,¹¹  yet since it is inconvenient for [general] use, it ranks as a karmelith.

When R. Dimi came, he said in R. Johanan's name: [The place] between the pillars¹²  is treated as a karmelith. What is the reason? Though the general public walk through there, since they cannot proceed with ease,¹³  it is as a karmelith. R. Zera said in Rab Judah's name: The balcony in front of the pillars is treated as a karmelith. Now, he who stated thus of [the ground] between the pillars, — how much more so the balcony!¹⁴  But he who mentions the balcony-only the balcony [ranks as a karmelith], because it is inconvenient for [general] use, but not [the ground] between the pillars, which is convenient for [general] use.¹⁵  Another version: but [the place] between the pillars, through which the public occasionally walk, is as public ground.

Rabbah b. Shila said in R. Hisda's name: If a brick is standing upright in the street, and one throws [an article]¹⁶  and it adheres to its side, he is liable; on top, he is not liable.¹⁷  Abaye and Raba both state: Providing that it is three handbreadths high, so that the public do not step on it;¹⁸  but thorns and shrubs, even if not three [handbreadths] high.¹⁹  Hiyya b. Rab maintained: Even thorns and shrubs, but not dung.²⁰  R. Ashi ruled: Even dung.

Rabbah, of the school of R. Shila, said: When R. Dimi came,²¹  he said in the name of R. Johanan: No karmelith can be less than four [handbreadths square].²²  And R. Shesheth said: And it extends²³  up to ten. What is meant by, 'and it extends up to ten?' Shall we say that only if there is a partition ten [handbreadths high] is it a karmelith, not otherwise;²⁴  but is it not? Surely R. Gidal said in the name of R. Hiyya b. Joseph in Rab's name: In the case of a house, the inside of which is not ten [hand breadths in height] but its covering makes it up to ten, it is permitted to carry on the roof over the whole [area];²⁵  but within, one may carry only four cubits!²⁶  But what is meant by 'and it extends up to ten?' That only up to ten is it a karmelith, but not higher.²⁷  And even as Samuel said to Rab Judah, Keen scholar!²⁸  In matters concerning the Sabbath do not consider²⁹  aught above ten. In what respect? Shall we say, that there is no private ground above ten? Surely R. Hisda said: If one fixes a rod in private ground³⁰  and throws [an article from the street] and it alights on the top, even if it is a hundred cubits high, he is liable, because private ground extends up to heaven!

1. i.e., it is enclosed by a fence, wall, etc. Though the Rabbis treat it as a karmelith in so far that carrying therein is forbidden, it is nevertheless private ground by Biblical law, and carrying between it and public ground involves liability. It is in that sense that the Mishnah designates it a private domain.
2. Se'ah is primarily a measure of capacity; by transference it is used as a surface measure on the basis that two se'ahs' seed require an area of five thousand square cubits.
3. V. Rashi: Aliter: which is not enclosed for living purposes.
4. 1 kor = 6 se'ahs.
5. An enclosed place is private ground by Biblical law, whatever its size. Now, if it is attached to a dwelling (or enclosed for living purposes), e.g., a house stood in a field and then the field, upon which one of the doors of the house opens, was enclosed, it remains private ground by Rabbinical law too. But if it is not connected with a house, it is private ground only up to the area of two se'ahs; beyond that one may not carry therein by Rabbinical law. Since, however, it is private ground by Biblical law, if one throws an article into it from public ground he is liable, and to this the Mishnah quoted refers when it states that a plain is private ground.
6. Viz., that the Mishnah means that it is a karmelith, because he prefers to explain it in accordance with 'Ulla's other dictum.
7. That being so, why does he not accept 'Ulla's explanation?
8. Which is definitely not a karmelith.
9. V. p. 12, n. 9.
10. At which stood a house the front of which the owner had thrown open to the public.
11. When the street is very crowded.
12. Pillars were erected in public squares or markets, upon which traders hung their wares.
13. Lit., 'directly'. On account of the numerous pillars, which were not always in a straight line.
14. Which is even less convenient. — The balcony was used as a stand for traders' stalls.
15. In his opinion.
16. Across a distance of at least four cubits.
17. When an article lies in the street and is less than ten handbreadths high and four square it is a place of non-liability; but that is only in respect of what can be put to a well-defined, natural use; e.g., the top of a low wall or of a brick, upon which articles may be placed. But the side of a wall or a brick can only give accidental service, as in the example, and in that case everything less than ten handbreadths high is as the street itself, and so when one throws an article and after traversing four cubits it cleaves to the side of the brick, it is as though it fell in the street, and he is liable. But the top, which, as explained by Abaye and Raba, is three handbreadths high, constitutes a separate domain — a place of non-liability.
18. Then it is not part of the street; v. preceding note. [Whether the surface area of the brick has to be four square handbreadths v. Tosaf. a.l.].
19. Rank as a separate domain, because people avoid stepping on them.
20. People wearing thick shoes may step upon the former; but dung is avoided.
21. V. P. 12, n. 9.
22. If it is, it is not a karmelith but a place of non-liability.
23. Lit., 'takes hold'.
24. I.e., an enclosed space less than two se'ahs in area and not attached to a house (v. p. 21, n. 7) is a karmelith only if its fencing is ten handbreadths high.
25. The roof is ten high, and therefore private ground.
26. Since it is unfit for a dwelling, its walls are disregarded and it ranks not as a private domain but as a karmelith (R. Han.). This is the reverse of our hypothesis.
27. If its top is more than ten handbreadths above ground level it is not a karmelith.
28. Or, man of long teeth.
29. Lit., 'be'.
30. A rod is generally less than four handbreadths square.

But [if it means] that there is no public ground above ten,¹  it is our Mishnah! For we learnt: If one throws [an article] four cubits on to a wall above ten handbreadths, it is as though he throws it into the air;²  if below ten, it is as though he throws it on to the ground.³  Hence he must refer to a karmelith, [teaching] that there is no karmelith above ten. And [R. Dimi and R. Shesheth inform us that] the Rabbis treated it with the leniencies of both private and public ground. 'With the leniencies of private ground': that only if [it measures] four [handbreadths square] is it a karmelith, but if not it is simply a place of non-liability. 'With the leniencies of public ground': only up to ten is it a karmelith, but above ten it is not a karmelith.

[To revert to] the main text: 'R. Gidal said in the name of R. Hiyya b. Joseph in Rab's name: In the case of a house, the inside of which is not ten [handbreadths in height] but its covering makes it up to ten, it is permitted to carry on the roof thereof over the whole [area]; but within, one may carry only four cubits.' Said Abaye: But if one digs out four square [handbreadths]⁴  and makes it up to ten, carrying over the whole is permitted. What is the reason? [The rest] is [as] cavities of a private domain, and such are [themselves] a private domain.⁵  For it was stated: The cavities of a private domain constitute private ground. As to the cavities of a public domain,⁶  — Abaye said: They are as public ground; Raba said: They are not as public ground.⁷  Said Raba to Abaye: According to you who maintains that the cavities of public ground are as public ground, wherein does it differ from what R. Dimi, when he came, said in the name of R. Johanan: 'This is necessary only in respect of a corner near to the street',⁸  — yet let it be as cavities of a public domain? — There the use thereof is inconvenient; here the use thereof is convenient.

We learnt: If one throws an article four cubits on to a wall, above ten handbreadths, it is as though he throws it into the air; if below ten, it is as though he throws it on to the ground.⁹  Now we discussed this: why 'as though he throws it on the ground'; surely it does not rest [there]?¹⁰  And R. Johanan answered: This refers to a juicy cake of figs.¹¹  But if you maintain that the cavities of public ground are as public ground, why relate it to a juicy cake of figs; relate it to a splinter or any article and it is a case where it alighted in a cavity? — Sometimes he answered him, A splinter or any other article are different, because they fall back;¹²  sometimes he answered him: The reference must be to a wall not possessing a cavity. — How do you know it? — Because the first clause states: If one throws above ten handbreadths, it is as though he throws it into the air. Now if you imagine that this refers to a wall with a cavity, why is it as though he throws It into the air; surely it came to rest in the cavity?¹³  And should you answer, Our Mishnah [refers to a cavity] that is not four square, — surely did not Rab Judah say in R. Hiyya's name: If one throws [an article] above ten handbreadths and it goes and alights in a cavity of any size,¹⁴  we come to a controversy of R. Meir and the Rabbis, R. Meir holding, We [imaginarily] hollow it out to complete it,¹⁵  while the Rabbis maintain, We do not hollow it out to complete it.¹⁶  Hence it surely follows that the reference is to a wall without a cavity. This proves it.

[To revert to] the main text: R. Hisda said: If one fixes a rod in private ground and throws [an article from the street] and it alights on the top, even if it is a hundred cubits high, he is liable, because private ground extends up to heaven'. Shall we say that R. Hisda holds with Rabbi?¹⁷  For it was taught: If one throws [an object] and it alights upon a projection of whatever size; Rabbi holds him liable; the Sages exempt him!

1. I.e., anything above ten handbreadths from ground level is not treated as public ground.
2. He is not liable.
3. And since it traverses four cubits, he is liable. — Why then need Samuel state it?
4. I.e., he lowers the level of four square handbreadths of the ground.
5. Cavities in a wall bounding private ground rank as private ground. Here, the lowered portion is true private ground, and the rest is regarded as cavities in an imaginary wall surrounding it.
6. I.e., in a wall fronting a street.
7. But constitute a separate domain. If four handbreadths square, they are a karmelith; if less, a place of non-liability.
8. V- supra 7a, notes, it is there accounted as a karmelith.
9. Mishnah, infra 100a.
10. Since it must rebound at least slightly, the final distance is less than the four cubits that is the least for which a penalty is incurred.
11. Which sticks.
12. Lit., 'come again'. Even if they do not rebound.
13. Which, if four handbreadths square, is private ground.
14. I.e., less than four square.
15. Where the wall is thick enough, we regard the small cavity as enlarged to four square, and liability is incurred.
16. And since the Mishnah under discussion is anonymous, it reflects R. Meir's view; v. Sanh. 86a.
17. That depositing upon a place four handbreadths square is not required.