SECTION 382 Whether the Residence of a Non-Jew Prevents [the Establishment of] an Eruv (1-23)

סימן שפב אִם דִּירַת גּוֹי מְעַכֶּבֶת בְּעֵרוּבוֹ וּבוֹ כ"ג סְעִיפִים:

1 [With regard to the laws of eruvin,] the dwelling of a non-Jew [has the halachic status] as that of the dwelling of an animal.1 Therefore, when one [Jew] dwells in the [same] courtyard as a non-Jew,2 [the non-Jew’s presence] does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden [in the courtyard], unless there are [at least] two Jews who dwell in two homes [in the same courtyard as the non-Jew.3 Since they share rights to the courtyard, the two-Jews] cause each other to be forbidden [to carry in it] and they must establish an eruv together.4 In such an instance, the non-Jew’s [presence] also causes [carrying] to be forbidden, and their eruv is not effective unless the non-Jew rents them his rights to the courtyard.5

[This requirement was] not [instituted] because [the non-Jew’s] home [has the halachic status] of a dwelling. Instead, the Sages were concerned that the Jews would learn from the conduct of the non-Jew when they dwell in [the same] courtyard6 and they sought a pretext to prevent [Jews from dwelling together with non-Jews in such close proximity]. Therefore, [the Sages] said that an eruv is not effective when [it is] established in a place where a non-Jew [also has a dwelling. Furthermore, the Sages decreed that] the non-Jew’s nullification of his rights7 is not effective unless [the non-Jew] rents out [his rights]. The non-Jew will not desire to rent out his rights because he is concerned that [the Jew] will practice sorcery against him. [As a result,] the Jew will find it difficult to continue living together [in the same courtyard] with [the non-Jew] because of the prohibition against carrying [in the courtyard on Shabbos], and will leave that [courtyard for another dwelling].

[The Sages did not institute such a requirement when only] one Jew lives in the same courtyard as a non-Jew because that is an infrequent occurrence. [The Jew] will be concerned [about his life], lest the non-Jew kill him, for non-Jews are suspect to murder.8 Hence, [the Sages] did not [feel it] necessary to prohibit [the Jew] from carrying because of the dwelling of the non-Jew [as a measure to motivate the Jew] to leave that place. By contrast, two Jews will not be afraid of [the non-Jew] and will live together with him. [Hence, our Sages were concerned lest] they be influenced by [the non-Jew’s] conduct.

Nevertheless, if many Jews reside in one dwelling,9 [the non-Jew’s presence] does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden even though they are not afraid of him, for the Sages did not desire to differentiate between a dwelling in which one [person] lives and a dwelling in which many [people] live. [Instead,] they permitted [carrying whenever there is but] one [Jewish] dwelling in all instances.

Moreover, there is also no obligation to rent the rights of a non-Jew who lives in a courtyard in which there are many [Jewish] homes, but [the residents] are all considered as [living in] one dwelling, and they do not cause each other to be forbidden [to carry] – and thus do not need to establish an eruv among themselves – e.g., brothers who dwell in separate houses in a courtyard, but receive their sustenance from their father. [This rule applies] in all other similar instances, as explained in sec. 370[:7].

א דִּירַת נָכְרִי כְּדִירַת בְּהֵמָה.א,1 לְפִיכָךְ הַדָּר עִם הַנָּכְרִי בֶּחָצֵר2 אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר עָלָיו, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ ב' יִשְׂרְאֵלִיםב דָּרִים בִּשְׁנֵי בָתִּים3 וְאוֹסְרִים זֶה עַל זֶה, וּצְרִיכִים לְעָרֵב יַחַד4 – אֲזַי גַּם הַנָּכְרִי אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶם,ג וְאֵין עֵרוּבָם מוֹעִיל עַד שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי יַשְׂכִּיר לָהֶם רְשׁוּתוֹ שֶׁבֶּחָצֵר.ד,5 וְלֹא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁדִּירָתוֹ דִּירָה, אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחָשְׁשׁוּ חֲכָמִים שֶׁמָּא יִלְמְדוּ הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִים מִמַּעֲשֵׂה הַנָּכְרִי כְּשֶׁיָּדוּרוּ בְּחָצֵר אַחַת,6 וּבִקְשׁוּ עִלָּה לִמְנוֹעַ דִּירַת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל עִם הַנָּכְרִי, וְלָכֵן אָמְרוּ שֶׁאֵין עֵרוּב מוֹעִיל בִּמְקוֹם נָכְרִי וְאֵין בִּטּוּל רְשׁוּת7 מוֹעִיל בְּנָכְרִי עַד שֶׁיַּשְׂכִּיר, וְהַנָּכְרִי לֹא יִרְצֶה לְהַשְׂכִּיר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיָּחוּשׁ לִכְשָׁפִים,ה,1 וְיִקְשֶׁה בְּעֵינֵי הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל דִּירָתוֹ עִמּוֹ מִפְּנֵי אִסּוּר טִלְטוּל, וְיֵצֵא מִשָּׁם.ו וּלְפִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מָצוּי שֶׁיָּדוּר יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶחָד עִם נָכְרִי בֶּחָצֵר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיָּחוּשׁ לְעַצְמוֹ שֶׁמָּא יַהַרְגֶנּוּ, כִּי הַנָּכְרִים חֲשׁוּדִים עַל שְׁפִיכַת דָּמִיםז,8 – לָכֵן לֹא הֻצְרְכוּ לֶאֱסוֹר עָלָיו הַטִּלְטוּל מִשּׁוּם דִּירַת הַנָּכְרִי כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵּצֵא מִשָּׁם. אֲבָל ב' יִשְׂרְאֵלִים אֵינָם יְרֵאִים מִמֶּנּוּ וְדָרִים עִמּוֹ, וְיִלְמְדוּ מִמַּעֲשָׂיו.ח

וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם אִם יִשְׂרְאֵלִים רַבִּים דָּרִים בְּבַיִת אֶחָד9 – אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶם,ט אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָם יְרֵאִים מִמֶּנּוּ, כִּי לֹא רָצוּ חֲכָמִים לַחֲלוֹק בֵּין בַּיִת שֶׁדָּר בּוֹ אֶחָד לְבַיִת שֶׁדָּרִים בּוֹ הַרְבֵּה, וְהִתִּירוּ בְּבַיִת אֶחָד בְּכָל עִנְיָן.י וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ בָּתִּים הַרְבֵּה שֶׁבֶּחָצֵר וְהֵם כְּבַיִת אֶחָד, שֶׁאֵינָם אוֹסְרִים זֶה עַל זֶה, כְּגוֹן הָאַחִין שֶׁדָּרִים כָּל אֶחָד בְּבַיִת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וּמְקַבְּלִים פְּרָס מֵאֲבִיהֶם הַדָּרִים עִם הַנָּכְרִי בֶּחָצֵר, וְכָל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶם מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"עיא שֶׁאֵין צְרִיכִים לְעָרֵב בֵּינֵיהֶם – אֵין צְרִיכִים גַּם כֵּן לִשְׂכּוֹר רְשׁוּת מִנָּכְרִי הַדָּר עִמָּהֶם בֶּחָצֵר:יב

2 When a Jew rents or lends a house in a courtyard to a non-Jew, [the presence of the non-Jew] does not cause [the Jew] to be forbidden [to carry] even though there is another Jew who lives in the courtyard10 with him.11 [The rationale is that the Jewish owner] did not rent or lend his house [to the non-Jew] with the intent that [the non-Jew] should cause him12 to be forbidden [to carry in his courtyard]. (True, [this assumption] is not accepted with regard to [a home that] is rented or lent to a Jew, as stated in sec. 370[:2. Nevertheless,] leniency was granted regarding a non-Jew.)

When, by contrast, the house belongs to a non-Jew and a Jew rents it from him, and the non-Jew dwells with [the Jew in that house] in a separate room in a manner that causes [the Jew] to be forbidden [to carry], as will be explained,13 the rental of the house from the non-Jew is not effective as a rental to permit carrying. Instead, [the Jew] must rent [the room] from [the non-Jew] again to permit carrying.14 (Were this not necessary, dwelling with [the non-Jew] would not be inconvenient and [the Jew] would not [want to] leave there.)

ב יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהִשְׂכִּיר אוֹ הִשְׁאִיל בַּיִת לְנָכְרִי בֶּחָצֵר – אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר עָלָיו, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ עוֹד יִשְׂרָאֵל דָּר עִמּוֹ11 בֶּחָצֵר,10 לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא הִשְׂכִּיר אוֹ הִשְׁאִיל לוֹ בֵּיתוֹ עַל דַּעַת שֶׁיֶּאֱסוֹר עָלָיויג,12 (וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבְּמַשְׂכִּיר אוֹ מַשְׁאִיל לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֵין אוֹמְרִים כֵּן, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"עיד – גַּבֵּי נָכְרִי הֵקֵלּוּטו).

אֲבָל אִם הַבַּיִת שֶׁל נָכְרִי וּשְׂכָרוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמֶּנּוּ,טז וְהַנָּכְרִי דָּר עִמּוֹ בְּחֶדֶר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ בְּעִנְיָן שֶׁאוֹסֵר עָלָיויז כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵריח,13 – אֵין שְׂכִירַת הַבַּיִת מוֹעֶלֶת לְעִנְיַן שְׂכִירוּת לְהַתִּיר טִלְטוּל, אֶלָּא צָרִיךְ לַחֲזוֹר וְלִשְׂכּוֹר מִמֶּנּוּ כְּדֵי לְהַתִּיר טִלְטוּליט,14 (שֶׁאִם לֹא כֵן לֹא יִקְשֶׁה בְּעֵינָיו דִּירָתוֹ עִמּוֹ וְלֹא יֵצֵא מִשָּׁםכ):

3 [The following laws apply when] a Jew owns two houses in a courtyard in which a non-Jew also lives; the Jew lives in one of [the houses] and lent or rented the other [house] to another Jew while retaining holdings – i.e., articles that may not be carried on Shabbos – in [the lent or rented house]. Even though [the two Jews] do not have to establish an eruv among themselves, as explained in sec. 370[:2], they must rent the non-Jew’s [rights] from him. [The rationale is that] retaining holdings cannot be more effective than establishing an eruv among themselves. [And since the establishment of an eruv] is not effective in uniting and joining [the Jewish residents of the courtyard] so that they will be deemed a single entity15 when a non-Jew is present to the extent that [the presence of] the non-Jew does not cause [the Jewish residents] to be forbidden [to carry, so too, retaining holdings is not effective].

ג יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ ב' בָּתִּים בְּחָצֵר שֶׁנָּכְרִי דָּר בָּהּ, וְהוּא דָר בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶם, וְהַשֵּׁנִי הִשְׁאִיל אוֹ הִשְׂכִּיר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אַחֵר, וְיֵשׁ לוֹ בּוֹ תְּפִיסַת יָד, דְּהַיְנוּ כֵּלִים שֶׁאֵינָם נִטָּלִים בְּשַׁבָּת – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵם אֵינָם צְרִיכִים לְעָרֵב בֵּינֵיהֶם, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"ע, צְרִיכִים לִשְׂכּוֹר מֵהַנָּכְרִי, לְפִי שֶׁתְּפִיסַת יָד אֵין לָהּ לְהוֹעִיל יוֹתֵר מִשֶּׁאִלּוּ עֵרְבוּ בֵּינֵיהֶם, שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוֹעִיל לְעָרְבָם וּלְשַׁתְּפָם שֶׁיִּהְיוּ כְּיָחִיד15 בִּמְקוֹם נָכְרִי, שֶׁאֵין הַנָּכְרִי אוֹסֵר עָלָיו:כא

4 [In the above situation,] if [all] the Jews [living in the courtyard] nullified their rights to one [Jew] so that they would be considered as a single [household] with regard to the presence of a non-Jew, it is not effective16 in allowing [the Jew to whom the others nullified their rights17 to carry from his home to the courtyard and vice-versa. The rationale is that] there are grounds for concern that [the residents of the courtyard] will do [this] every week, and thus the laws of eruvin will be nullified for that courtyard. [Thus,] if [in the future, the residents of the courtyard] will not nullify their rights, but instead establish an eruv, there are grounds for concern that they will err and say that an eruv is effective [even] when a non-Jew is present.

ד אִם בִּטְּלוּ הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִים רְשׁוּתָם לְאֶחָד מֵהֶם כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵּחָשֵׁב כְּיָחִיד בִּמְקוֹם נָכְרִי – אֵינוֹ מוֹעִיל 16 לוֹ,כב,17 שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָחוּשׁ שֶׁבְּכָל שַׁבָּת יַעֲשׂוּ כָּךְ וְתִתְבַּטֵּל תּוֹרַת עֵרוּב מֵאוֹתָהּ חָצֵר. וְאִם יְעָרְבוּ, יֵשׁ לָחוּשׁ שֶׁיִּטְעוּ לוֹמַר עֵרוּב מוֹעִיל בִּמְקוֹם נָכְרִי:כג,16

Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch (Sichos In English)

The new layout – with the original text and the facing translation – provides a unique user-friendly approach to studying the Alter Rebbe’s work. An inclusive commentary provides insightful explanations and guidelines for actual practice.

5 If the non-Jew does not have the right to pass through the Jews’ [property, his presence] does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden. For example, there are two courtyards that open to each other, and the [residents] of one [courtyard] do not have the right to enter the other [courtyard], i.e., [the courtyards] are not located one behind the other, but one next to the other, and each of [the courtyards] has [its own] entrance to a lane. A non-Jew dwells in one [courtyard] and two or more Jews dwell in the other [courtyard. Articles] may be brought in and out from one [courtyard] to the other via the entrances and the windows between them [on Shabbos. The Jews] are only required to rent the non-Jew’s [rights] if they desire to make a shituf, [that enables them to carry] in the lane. In that instance, [the presence of the non-Jew] causes [the Jews] to be forbidden [to carry] in the lane, since he has the right to pass through it.18

ה אִם אֵין לַנָּכְרִי דְּרִיסַת הָרֶגֶל עַל הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִים – אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר. כְּגוֹן ב' חֲצֵרוֹת הַפְּתוּחוֹת זוֹ לְזוֹ וְאֵין לָהֶן דְּרִיסַת הָרֶגֶל זוֹ עַל זוֹ, דְּהַיְנוּ שֶׁאֵין זוֹ לִפְנִים מִזּוֹ אֶלָּא זוֹ בְּצַד זוֹ, וּשְׁתֵּיהֶן פְּתוּחוֹת לְמָבוֹי, וּבְאַחַת מֵהֶן דָּר נָכְרִי וּבַשְּׁנִיָּה דָּרִים ב' יִשְׂרְאֵלִים אוֹ יוֹתֵר – מַכְנִיסִים וּמוֹצִיאִים מִזּוֹ לְזוֹכד דֶּרֶךְ פְּתָחִיםכה וְחַלּוֹנוֹתכו שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶן, וְאֵינָם צְרִיכִים לִשְׂכּוֹר מֵהַנָּכְרִי אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן רוֹצִים לְהִשְׁתַּתֵּף בַּמָּבוֹי, שֶׁאָז הוּא אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶם בַּמָּבוֹי, כֵּיוָן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בּוֹ דְּרִיסַת הָרֶגֶל:כז,18

6 The rental of a non-Jew’s [rights] is effective [even though the reason for doing so] is not specified. It is not necessary to explain to [the non-Jew] that this is being done to enable carrying to be permitted [in the courtyard on Shabbos].19 It is [also] not necessary to compose a document recording the rental.20

ו הַשּׂוֹכֵר מִן הַנָּכְרִי סְתָם – מוֹעִיל,כח וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְפָרֵשׁ לוֹ שֶׁהוּא לְהַתִּיר הַטִּלְטוּל,19 וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִכְתּוֹב שׁוּם כְּתִיבָה עַל הַשְּׂכִירוּת:כט,20

7 A non-Jew’s [rights] may be rented for even less than a perutah,21 for a non-Jew considers even less than a perutah to be of financial value. [If,] however, a Jew does not want to nullify his rights and only desires to rent them,22 less than a perutah is not considered as financially significant to him at all even if he consents to that [price]. True, were [the Jew] to nullify his rights for no money at all, it would be effective. Nevertheless [this instance is different], since [the Jew] desires solely to rent his rights. [Thus, in this instance,] there is no [valid] rental,23 nor is there a [valid] nullification, since [a person who] nullifies his rights relinquishes his rights [to his domain].24 This person, [by contrast,] is not relinquishing his [rights]; he [is seeking] to rent [them, and the rental agreement is invalid].

ז שׂוֹכְרִים מִן הַנָּכְרִי אֲפִלּוּ בְּפָחוֹת מִשָּׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה,ל,21 לְפִי שֶׁלְּגַבֵּי בֶּן נֹחַ אֲפִלּוּ פָּחוֹת מִשָּׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה נֶחְשָׁב לוֹ מָמוֹן.לא אֲבָל יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁאֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה לְבַטֵּל רְשׁוּתוֹ אֶלָּא לְהַשְׂכִּירלב,22 – אֵין פָּחוֹת מִשָּׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה נֶחְשָׁב לוֹ מָמוֹן כְּלָל, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מִתְרַצֶּה בּוֹ. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאִם הָיָה מְבַטֵּל בְּחִנָּם הָיָה מוֹעִיל, מִכָּל מָקוֹם כֵּיוָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה אֶלָּא לְהַשְׂכִּיר, וּשְׂכִירוּת אֵין כַּאן23 וּבִטּוּל אֵין כַּאן,לג שֶׁהַבִּטּוּל הוּא שֶׁמְּסַלֵּק עַצְמוֹ מֵרְשׁוּת,לד,24 וְזֶה לֹא סִלֵּק עַצְמוֹ אֶלָּא לְהַשְׂכִּיר:לה

8 It is permitted to rent a non-Jew’s [rights] even on Shabbos.25Doing so is not considered as conducting a transaction,26 since [the Jew] is not purchasing the rights from the non-Jew, only renting them. True, renting is also forbidden on Shabbos27 because it resembles commercial activity, for [the renter] gives money for the object that he is renting like a purchaser gives [money] for [the object] he purchases. Nevertheless, [in this instance, the Jew] is not renting [the non-Jew’s] domain for its use, only to permit carrying. Hence, the [payment the Jew] gives [the non-Jew] is merely a present. It does not resemble commercial activity where [the purchaser] gives [money to the seller] for the article he purchases for the sake of its use.

It is, however, forbidden to purchase [a non-Jew’s] rights on Shabbos even though [the Jew] is purchasing them solely to permit carrying. [Indeed,] even if [the non-Jew] offers [his rights] as an outright present, [this is also forbidden,] as explained in sec. 380[:1] and as will be explained in sec. 528.28

ח מֻתָּר לִשְׂכּוֹר מִן הַנָּכְרִי אֲפִלּוּ בְּשַׁבָּת,לו,25 וְאֵין בְּזֶה מִשּׁוּם מִקָּח וּמִמְכָּר,26 שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינוֹ קוֹנֶה רְשׁוּת מִן הַנָּכְרִי אֶלָּא שׂוֹכְרָהּ. וְאַף שֶׁשְּׂכִירוּת גַּם כֵּן אֲסוּרִים בְּשַׁבָּת27 מִשּׁוּם שֶׁדּוֹמֶה לְמִקָּח וּמִמְכָּר, שֶׁנּוֹתֵן לוֹ דָּמִים בְּעַד הַחֵפֶץ שֶׁשּׂוֹכֵר כְּמוֹ שֶׁהַלּוֹקֵחַ נוֹתֵן בְּעַד הַמֶּכֶרלז – מִכָּל מָקוֹם כַּאן, כֵּיוָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ שׂוֹכֵר רְשׁוּתוֹ כְּדֵי לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהּ אֶלָּא לְהַתִּיר הַטִּלְטוּל בִּלְבָד,לח אִם כֵּן הַדָּמִים שֶׁנּוֹתֵן לוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא מַתָּנָה בְּעָלְמָא,לט וְאֵינוֹ דוֹמֶה לְמִקָּח וּמִמְכָּר, שֶׁנּוֹתֵן לוֹ בְּעַד הַמֶּכֶר הַנִּקְנֶה לוֹ לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ.

אֲבָל לִקְנוֹת רְשׁוּת בְּשַׁבָּת – אָסוּר, אַף שֶׁאֵינוֹ קוֹנֶה אֶלָּא לְהַתִּיר טִלְטוּל, וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּמַתְּנַת חִנָּם, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"פמ וּכְמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן תקכ"ח:מא,28

9 As long as the non-Jew does not retract [the rental agreement], the rental is effective, even for an extended period of time.29 If [the non-Jew seeks to] retract from [the rental agreement] before the first Shabbos, he may not [do so] unless he returns the money. If [the Jews] manifested possession of the courtyard before [the non-Jew] retracted [from the rental agreement, the non-Jew] may not retract [from the rental agreement] for this Shabbos even if he returns the money, provided [the Jews] manifested possession of [the courtyard] after the commencement of the Shabbos, as explained in sec. 381[:1.30 Nevertheless,the non-Jew] may retract [the rental agreement] regarding a subsequent Shabbos even though he does not return the money. [Returning the money is not necessary] since the rental was already effective for one Shabbos.31

When does the above apply? When [the Jews] rented [the non-Jew’s rights] without making any stipulations and did not specify a period of time. If, however, [the Jews] rented [the non-Jew’s rights] from him for a [specific] time, [the non-Jew] may not retract from [the rental agreement] during that time unless he returns the portion of the money appropriate for the remaining time. (The same [rule applies] if [the Jews] explicitly rented [the non-Jew’s rights] forever.)

ט כָּל זְמַן שֶׁאֵין הַנָּכְרִי חוֹזֵר בּוֹ – מוֹעֶלֶת הַשְּׂכִירוּת, וַאֲפִלּוּ לִזְמַן מְרֻבֶּה.מב,29 וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר בּוֹ מִשְּׂכִירוּתוֹ עַד שֶׁיַּחֲזִיר הַדָּמִיםמג אִם חוֹזֵר בּוֹ קֹדֶם שַׁבָּת רִאשׁוֹנָה.מד

וְאִם הֶחֱזִיקוּ בֶּחָצֵר קֹדֶם שֶׁחָזַר בּוֹ – שׁוּב אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר בּוֹ לְשַׁבָּת זוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמַּחֲזִיר הַדָּמִים. וְהוּא שֶׁהֶחֱזִיקוּ אַחַר כְּנִיסַת שַׁבָּת,מה כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן שפ"א.מו,30

אֲבָל לְשַׁבָּת הָאַחֶרֶת יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר בּוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַחֲזִיר הַדָּמִים, כֵּיוָן שֶׁכְּבָר הוֹעִילָה שְׂכִירוּתוֹ לְשַׁבָּת אַחַת.מז,31

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? כְּשֶׁשָּׂכְרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ סְתָם וְלֹא פֵרְשׁוּ לוֹ זְמַן. אֲבָל אִם שָׂכְרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ לִזְמַן, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר בּוֹ בְּתוֹךְ הַזְּמַן,מח,29 עַד שֶׁיַּחֲזִיר הַדָּמִיםמט לְפִי עֶרֶךְ אֹרֶךְ הַזְּמַן הַנִּשְׁאָרנ (וְכֵן אִם שָׂכְרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ לְעוֹלָם בְּפֵרוּשׁנא):

10 If a non-Jew’s rights were rented out for a set time, when that time period ends, it is necessary to renew the rental [agreement]. Moreover, the eruv [established among the Jews] must also be renewed. The initial eruv does not automatically become valid again,32 because it was nullified when that time period ended. ([This situation] does not resemble an eruv that was established for a year and, [in the middle of the year,] the entrance [to the courtyard] was closed during the week and reopened on Shabbos. [In that instance,] the eruv automatically becomes valid again, as stated in sec. 374[:1. The eruv becomes valid in that instance,] because at the time it was established, it was [intended to be valid] for this Shabbos as well and it was not expected to be nullified at the beginning of this Shabbos, because the entrance [to the courtyard] that was open at that time was not expected to be closed at the beginning of this Shabbos. In the instance at hand, by contrast, at the time the eruv was established, the eruv was expected to be nullified at the end of the term of the rental [unless] the rental agreement was renewed again. Thus, it resembles a situation where [an eruv was established in a courtyard where a non-Jew lived and the non-Jew was not present to rent his property,33 but then] the non-Jew came on Shabbos,34as stated in sec. 383[:2].)

י אִם שָׂכְרוּ מֵהַנָּכְרִי לִזְמַן יָדוּעַ – כְּשֶׁיִּכְלֶה הַזְּמַן צָרִיךְ לַחֲזוֹר וְלִשְׂכּוֹר מִמֶּנּוּ שֵׁנִית,נב וְצָרִיךְ לַחֲזוֹר וּלְעָרֵב, שֶׁאֵין עֵרוּב הָרִאשׁוֹן חוֹזֵר וְנֵעוֹר,32 שֶׁכְּבָר נִתְבַּטֵּל בִּכְלוֹת הַזְּמַןנג (וְאֵינוֹ דוֹמֶה לְעֵרֵב לְשָׁנָה וְנִסְתַּם הַפֶּתַח בְּחֹל וְנִפְתַּח בְּשַׁבָּת, שֶׁהָעֵרוּב חוֹזֵר וְנֵעוֹרנד,32 כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן שע"ד,נה לְפִי שֶׁבִּשְׁעַת עֲשִׂיָּתוֹ נַעֲשָׂה אַף לְשַׁבָּת זוֹ, וְלֹא הָיָה עוֹמֵד לְהִתְבַּטֵּל בִּתְחִלַּת שַׁבָּת זוֹ, שֶׁהֲרֵי הַפֶּתַח שֶׁהָיָה פָּתוּחַ אָז לֹא הָיָה עוֹמֵד לִהְיוֹת נִסְתָּם בִּתְחִלַּת שַׁבָּת זוֹ. מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן כַּאן, שֶׁבִּשְׁעַת עֲשִׂיַּת הָעֵרוּב הָיָה עוֹמֵד לְהִתְבַּטֵּל כְּשֶׁיִּכְלֶה זְמַן הַשְּׂכִירוּת עַד שֶׁיַּחְזְרוּ וְיִשְׂכְּרוּ שֵׁנִית,נו וַהֲרֵי זֶה דוֹמֶה33 לְבָא נָכְרִי בְּשַׁבָּתנז,34 שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן שפ"גנח):

11 If a non-Jew’s [rights] were rented out for a specific time and within the term of that [agreement], the non-Jew rented out his dwelling to another non-Jew, the original rental is sufficient [for the purposes of establishing an eruv. The original rental] was not nullified by [the non-Jew] renting out [his property] to another [non-Jewish] person, since [the first non-Jew] did not withdraw from [the agreement], for ultimately [the property] will return to him. Thus, it is [considered] as if [the property] never left [the non-Jew’s] possession, and it is presently [considered to be] within his domain as well.

If, however, [the non-Jew] died or sold [the property] to another [non-Jew] within the term of that [agreement], it is necessary to rent the property from the heir or the purchaser. [The rationale is that] the domain of the initial [owner] ceased and his rental was nullified, as is the case when a Jew who joined in an eruv dies, [in which instance,] his [participation in the] eruv is nullified, as stated in sec. 371[:3].

יא אִם שָׂכְרוּ מִן הַנָּכְרִי לִזְמַן יָדוּעַ, וּבְתוֹךְ הַזְּמַן הִשְׂכִּיר הַנָּכְרִי דִּירָתוֹ לְנָכְרִי אַחֵר – דַּי בִּשְׂכִירוּת הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁלֹּא נִתְבַּטְּלָה בְּמַה שֶּׁהִשְׂכִּירָהּ לְאַחֵר,נט לְפִי שֶׁבְּזֶה לֹא סִלֵּק נַפְשׁוֹ מִמֶּנָּה כֵּיוָן שֶׁלְּאַחַר זְמַן תַּחֲזוֹר לוֹ, וַהֲרֵי זֶה כְּאִלּוּ לֹא זָזָה יָדוֹ מִמֶּנָּה כְּלָל, וַהֲרֵי הִיא אַף עַכְשָׁו בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ.ס אֲבָל אִם מֵת,סא אוֹ שֶׁמְּכָרָהּסב לְאַחֵר בְּתוֹךְ הַזְּמַן – צָרִיךְ לַחֲזוֹר וְלִשְׂכּוֹר מֵהַיּוֹרֵשׁ אוֹ מֵהַלּוֹקֵחַ, שֶׁכְּבָר פָּסַק רְשׁוּת הָרִאשׁוֹן וְנִתְבַּטְּלָה שְׂכִירוּתוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁעֵרֵב וּמֵת נִתְבַּטֵּל עֵרוּבוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן שע"א:

12 When five [Jews] live together [with a non-Jew] in one courtyard, it is unnecessary for each one of them to individually rent [the rights of the non-Jew] living with them [in the courtyard]. Instead, one [of the Jews] may rent [these rights] on behalf of all of them.35 It is unnecessary for [the person] to specify that he is renting [these rights] on behalf of all of them. Instead, he may rent [the rights] for himself and then all [the others] are permitted [to carry. The rationale is that] since he establishes an eruv with them, they are all like one person, and it is sufficient for [the non-Jew] to rent [his rights to the courtyard] to one of them, just as – with regard to establishing an eruv, if [the residents of one courtyard] wish to establish an eruv with [the residents of] another courtyard – it is sufficient that [only] one [of the residents of the initial courtyard] contribute bread, even his own [bread], and then, all the residents [of his courtyard] are permitted [to use the second courtyard] since he already established an eruv with [the residents of his courtyard], as explained in sec. 372[:4].

יב חֲמִשָּׁה הַדָּרִים בְּחָצֵר אֶחָד אֵינָם צְרִיכִים כָּל אֶחָד לִשְׂכּוֹר מֵהַנָּכְרִי הַדָּר עִמָּהֶם, אֶלָּא אֶחָד שׂוֹכֵר בִּשְׁבִיל כֻּלָּם.סג וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְפָרֵשׁ לוֹ גַּבֵּי שְׂכִירוּת שֶׁיַּשְׂכִּיר לְכֻלָּם, אֶלָּא שׂוֹכֵר לְעַצְמוֹ וְכֻלָּם מֻתָּרִים, שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא עֵרֵב עִמָּהֶם – הֲרֵי כֻּלָּם כְּאִישׁ אֶחָד, וְדַי שֶׁיַּשְׂכִּיר לְאֶחָד מֵהֶם,סד כְּמוֹ שֶׁלְּעִנְיַן עֵרוּב אִם הֵם רוֹצִים לְעָרֵב עִם חָצֵר אַחֶרֶת – דַּי שֶׁאֶחָד מֵהֶם יִתֵּן הַפַּתסה,35 אֲפִלּוּ מִשֶּׁלּוֹ וְכֻלָּם מֻתָּרִים, כֵּיוָן שֶׁכְּבָר עֵרֵב עִמָּהֶם, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן שע"ב:סו

13 If [the rights to the non-Jew’s property] were rented from [the non-Jew] against his will, [the agreement] is not valid.36 [This ruling applies] even if [the non-Jew] was accustomed to renting out [his rights] previously. [This situation] is not comparable to [establishing] an eruv [with a fellow Jew, in which instance] it is permitted to take [bread for an] eruv from a Jew who is accustomed to participating in an eruv [even when presently it is] against his will.37 [The reason for the distinction is that] we may compel a Jew to fulfill a mitzvah that he is accustomed to fulfilling. This does not apply to a non-Jew.

יג אִם שָׂכְרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ בְּעַל כָּרְחוֹ – אֵינוֹ מוֹעִיל,סז,36 אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה רָגִיל לְהַשְׂכִּיר מִקֹּדֶם.סח וְאֵינוֹ דוֹמֶה לְעֵרוּב, שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל הָרָגִיל לְעָרֵב נוֹטְלִין מִמֶּנּוּ עֵרוּבוֹ בְּעַל כָּרְחוֹ,סט,37 לְפִי שֶׁהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל אָנוּ יְכוֹלִים לְכֻפּוֹ לְקַיֵּם דְּבַר מִצְוָה שֶׁהֻרְגַּל בָּהּ, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּנָכְרִי:ע

14 Nevertheless, [the non-Jew’s] wife and the members of his household38 – even [the non-Jew’s] hired workers and his harvest help39 ([who live] in his house)40 – may rent out [his rights to the property] even though he protests. Since the sole reason a non-Jew’s dwelling [in the same courtyard as Jews] causes [carrying] to be forbidden is so that [Jews] will not be influenced by his conduct, leniency is granted and even [the non-Jew’s] hired hands are considered equivalent to him. [Our Sages accepted this possibility] since there are times when even the [non-Jew’s] workers will not desire to rent out [the non-Jew’s rights to the property] and the Jew will leave that courtyard.

For this reason, even a worker hired by the [non-Jew’s] worker may rent out [the non-Jew’s rights to the property] even if both the [non-Jew’s] worker and the [non-Jewish] owner [himself] protest.

יד אֲבָל מֵאִשְׁתּוֹעא אוֹ בְּנֵי בֵיתוֹ,עב,38 אוֹ אֲפִלּוּ מִשְּׂכִירוֹ וּלְקִיטוֹעג,39 (שֶׁבְּבֵיתוֹעד)40 – שׂוֹכְרִים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מוֹחֶה,עה שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁדִּירַת הַנָּכְרִי אֵינָהּ אוֹסֶרֶת אֶלָּא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִלְמוֹד מִמַּעֲשָׂיו, הֵקֵלּוּ בָּהּ לִהְיוֹת אֲפִלּוּ שְׂכִירוֹ נֶחְשָׁב כָּמֹהוּ, לְפִי שֶׁלִּפְעָמִים גַּם הַשָּׂכִיר לֹא יִרְצֶה לְהַשְׂכִּיר וְיֵצֵא הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מִשָּׁם.עו וּמִזֶּה הַטַּעַם אֲפִלּוּ שְׂכִירוֹ שֶׁל שְׂכִירוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַשְׂכִּיר כְּמוֹ הַשָּׂכִיר עַצְמוֹ,עז וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם הַשָּׂכִיר [וּ]בַעַל הַבַּיִת מוֹחִים:

15 If the non-Jew does not want to rent out [the rights to his property], one of the [Jewish] residents of the courtyard should develop a rapport with [the non-Jew] and befriend him until the non-Jew would permit [the Jewish resident] to borrow a place in his domain where [the Jew] will have the right to leave an object [of his]. It is then considered as if this Jew is living with the non-Jew [in the same house], even though [the Jew] did not actually place an object [in the non-Jew’s property], but merely acquired [the right to do so] through one of the formal means through which land is acquired.41 In this manner, the Jew is considered as if he is [the non-Jew’s] hired worker or harvest help ([who lives] in his house). [The Jew] may [then] rent out [the rights to the non-Jew’s property] without [the non-Jew’s] consent.

There are authorities who maintain [that the Jew who befriended the non-Jew] need not rent out [the rights to the non-Jew’s property]. Instead, it is sufficient for [the Jew] to give [bread for] the eruv together with the other residents of the courtyard, [thus including] his house [in the eruv], and this is sufficient to also include the non-Jew’s house. [The rationale is that] since [this person] joined in an eruv with [the other residents], they are all considered as one person. Since [this Jew] became [equivalent to] the worker [of the non-Jew], he is considered comparable to the non-Jewish owner. Thus, all [the other residents of the courtyard] have a portion in the domain of the non-Jew, just like when one of the residents of the courtyard rents the non-Jew’s rights, [and] all [the residents of the courtyard] have a portion in this rental.42 As an initial preference, one should give weight to the first opinion.

טו אִם אֵין הַנָּכְרִי רוֹצֶה לְהַשְׂכִּיר, יִתְקָרֵב לוֹ אֶחָד מִבְּנֵי הֶחָצֵרעח וְיֵעָשֶׂה אוֹהֲבוֹ,עט עַד שֶׁיַּשְׁאִיל לוֹ הַנָּכְרִי מָקוֹם בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ שֶׁיְּהֵא לוֹ רְשׁוּת לְהַנִּיחַ בּוֹ שׁוּם דָּבָר, וְאָז אָנוּ רוֹאִים כְּאִלּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה הוּא דָר אֵצֶל הַנָּכְרִי, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא הִנִּיחַ אֶצְלוֹ שׁוּם דָּבָר, רַק שֶׁקָּנָה מִמֶּנּוּ בְּאֶחָד מֵהַדְּרָכִים שֶׁקַּרְקַע נִקְנֶה בָּהֶם,פ,41 וְנַעֲשֶׂה יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה כְּאִלּוּ הוּא שְׂכִירוֹ אוֹ לְקִיטוֹפא (שֶׁבְּבֵיתוֹפב) וּמַשְׂכִּיר שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ.פג וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִיםפד שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַשְׂכִּיר, אֶלָּא נוֹתֵן עֵרוּבוֹ עִם בְּנֵי הֶחָצֵר בִּשְׁבִיל בֵּיתוֹ, וְדַיּוֹ בְּכָךְ גַּם בִּשְׁבִיל בֵּית הַנָּכְרִי, שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁעֵרֵב עִמָּהֶם נַעֲשׂוּ כֻלָּם כְּאִישׁ אֶחָד, וְכֵיוָן שֶׁהוּא נַעֲשֶׂה שְׂכִירוֹ, שֶׁהוּא נֶחְשָׁב כְּבַעַל הַבַּיִת בְּבֵית הַנָּכְרִי – הֲרֵי יֵשׁ לְכֻלָּם חֵלֶק בִּרְשׁוּת הַנָּכְרִי כָּמֹהוּ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁאֶחָד מִבְּנֵי הֶחָצֵר הַשּׂוֹכֵר רְשׁוּת מֵהַנָּכְרִי – יֵשׁ לְכֻלָּם חֵלֶק בִּשְׂכִירוּת זוֹ.פה,42 וּלְכַתְּחִלָּה יֵשׁ לָחוּשׁ לִסְבָרָא הָרִאשׁוֹנָה:פו

16 If [the non-Jew] lent43 [the Jew] a specific place [in his property] in a manner that [the non-Jew] is unable (to remove [the Jew] from this place) and use it himself,44 the non-Jew has been separated from the Jew with regard to this place that he set aside for [the Jew], and the Jew is separated from the non-Jew with regard to the remainder of the house, for [the Jew] does not have permission to place his articles there. Even though [the non-Jew] did not explicitly prevent [the Jew] from [putting down his property in the remainder of the house], but merely did not offer his consent that he do so, [the Jew] may not rent out [the non-Jew’s rights] without his consent.

(Even if [the Jew] is [the non-Jew’s] worker or harvest help and [the non-Jew] set aside a room in his house for [the Jew] to dwell in, if [the non-Jew] cannot remove [the Jew] from [that room] and use it for his own [purposes, the Jew] may not rent out [the non-Jew’s rights] without his consent, for the non-Jew has been separated from [the Jew] and [the Jew] has been separated from the non-Jew.)

Therefore, if a Jew and a non-Jew live in one house, each one in a separate room, it is necessary [for the people dwelling in that courtyard] to rent the non-Jew’s [rights] and establish an eruv with the Jew.45 The Jew may not rent out the non-Jew’s rights, since the non-Jew may not remove [the Jew from his room] and [the Jew] does not have permission to place his articles in the room of the non-Jew.

The same concepts apply when [two] non-Jews live together in one house under such an arrangement. It is necessary to rent [the rights] from both of them.

טז אִם הִשְׁאִיל לוֹ מָקוֹם מְיֻחָדפז בְּעִנְיָן שֶׁלֹּא יוּכַל (לְסַלְּקוֹ מִמָּקוֹם זֶה) וּלְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ בְּעַצְמוֹ,44 שֶׁנִּמְצָא הַנָּכְרִי מְסֻלָּק מֵהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל בְּמָקוֹם זֶה שֶׁיִּחֵד לוֹפח וְהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מְסֻלָּק מֵהַנָּכְרִי מִשְּׁאָר הַבַּיִת, שֶׁאֵין לוֹ רְשׁוּת לְהַנִּיחַ שָׁם חֲפָצָיופט,43 – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא מְנָעוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ בְּפֵרוּשׁ, אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן לוֹ רְשׁוּת – אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַשְׂכִּיר שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתּוֹצ (וַאֲפִלּוּ הוּא שְׂכִירוֹ אוֹ לְקִיטוֹ וְיִחֵד לוֹ חֶדֶרצא בְּבֵיתוֹ לָדוּר בּוֹ, אִם הוּא בְּעִנְיָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְסַלְּקוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ וּלְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ בְּעַצְמוֹ – אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַשְׂכִּיר שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ, שֶׁהֲרֵי הַנָּכְרִי מְסֻלָּק מִמֶּנּוּ וְהוּא מֵהַנָּכְרִי).

לְפִיכָךְ אִם יִשְׂרָאֵל וְנָכְרִי דָּרִים בְּבַיִת אֶחָדצב כָּל אֶחָד בְּחֶדֶר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ,צג צָרִיךְ לִשְׂכּוֹר מֵהַנָּכְרִי וּלְעָרֵב עִם הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל.45 וְאֵין הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל יָכוֹל לְהַשְׂכִּיר רְשׁוּת הַנָּכְרִי, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין הַנָּכְרִי יָכוֹל לְסַלְּקוֹ וְהוּא אֵין לוֹ רְשׁוּת לְהַנִּיחַ חֲפָצָיו בְּחֶדֶר הַנָּכְרִי.

וְהוּא הַדִּין בְּנָכְרִים הַדָּרִיםצד בְּעִנְיָן זֶהצה בְּבַיִת אֶחָד – צָרִיךְ לִשְׂכּוֹר מִשְּׁנֵיהֶם:45

17 If [Jews] rented [a non-Jew’s rights] from his worker or harvest help for a specific length of time, [the Jews in the courtyard] are permitted [to carry in the courtyard] until the end of that time, even though [in the interim] the non-Jew dismissed the worker or harvest help [from his position]. If, however, [the Jews] rented [the rights] from [the non-Jew’s employee] without any specifications [as to the length of the time of the rental], the rental agreement terminates with [the employee’s] dismissal. True, while the worker is employed, he has the right to rent out [the non-Jew’s rights] like the [non-Jewish] owner himself, and [when] one rents out property and remains silent the rental agreement is effective as long as [the person renting out the property] does not retract – even over an extended period of time.46 Nevertheless, [in this instance,] since [the worker’s] authority to rent out [the owner’s rights] only stems from the owner’s hiring [the person] to serve him, and [the person] is considered like the owner [for that reason alone, therefore,] when the owner dismisses [the employee] it is as if the owner revoked the rental agreement. [The revocation is effective because] one who enters into a rental agreement of unspecified length may retract [his agreement] after the first Shabbos even though he does not return the money [given for the rental]. (This is not so when one enters into a rental agreement for a [specific period of] time, as explained above.)

The same law applies if one rented [rights] from the treasurer of the king47 and the treasurer was dismissed. [This ruling] applies provided [the treasurer] was unreservedly dismissed, [i.e.,] he no longer receives his livelihood from the king. If, however, [the person] was only dismissed from [his position at] the treasury, but he still receives his livelihood from [the king], he is [still] considered like [the king’s] worker and harvest help, and one may rent [the rights] from him, [even as an] initial preference.48 Certainly, a rental agreement [that this person previously arranged] is not nullified. Similarly, a rental agreement may be made [even] with any of the menial workers in the king’s (home), just like one [arranges] a rental agreement with a home-owner’s worker or harvest help.49 ([Moreover,] one may rent [the king’s rights] from the servants of the king’s servants just like one may rent [rights] from a worker’s hired worker.)

יז שָׂכְרוּ מִשְּׂכִירוֹ וּלְקִיטוֹ לִזְמַן יָדוּעַ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁסִּלְּקוֹ תּוֹךְ הַזְּמַן מִהְיוֹת שְׂכִירוֹ וּלְקִיטוֹ – מֻתָּרִים עַד תֹּם הַזְּמַן.צו אֲבָל אִם שָׂכְרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ סְתָם, כֵּיוָן שֶׁסִּלְּקוֹ – נִתְבַּטֵּל הַשְּׂכִירוּת.צז וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא שְׂכִירוֹ יֵשׁ לוֹ כֹּחַ לְהַשְׂכִּיר כְּבַעַל הַבַּיִת בְּעַצְמוֹ, וְהַמַּשְׂכִּיר וְשׁוֹתֵק – כָּל זְמַן שֶׁאֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר בּוֹ מוֹעֶלֶת שְׂכִירוּתוֹ אֲפִלּוּ לִזְמַן מְרֻבֶּה,צח,46 מִכָּל מָקוֹם מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵין כֹּחוֹ בִּשְׂכִירוּתוֹ אֶלָּא מִצַּד בַּעַל הַבַּיִת שֶׁשָּׂכַר אוֹתוֹ לְשָׁרְתוֹ, וְנֶחְשָׁב כְּאִלּוּ הוּא בַּעַל הַבַּיִת, אִם כֵּן כְּשֶׁסִּלְּקוֹ בַּעַל הַבַּיִת – הֲרֵי זֶה כְּאִלּוּ חוֹזֵר בּוֹ בַּעַל הַבַּיִת מִשְּׂכִירוּתוֹ,צט וְהַמַּשְׂכִּיר סְתָם יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר בּוֹ אַחַר שַׁבָּת רִאשׁוֹנָה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַחֲזִיר הַדָּמִיםק,46 (מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּמַשְׂכִּיר לִזְמַן כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְמַעְלָה).46

וְהוּא הַדִּין אִם שָׂכַר מִגִּזְבַּר הַמֶּלֶךְקא,47 וְנִסְתַּלֵּק הַגִּזְבָּר,קב וְהוּא שֶׁסִּלְּקוֹ לְגַמְרֵי, שֶׁשּׁוּב אֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל פְּרַס הַמֶּלֶךְ. אֲבָל אִם לֹא סִלְּקוֹ אֶלָּא מֵהַגִּזְבְּרָאוּת, וַעֲדַיִן הוּא אוֹכֵל פְּרָס שֶׁלּוֹ – הֲרֵי הוּא כִּשְׂכִירוֹ וּלְקִיטוֹקג וְשׂוֹכְרִין מִמֶּנּוּ לְכַתְּחִלָּה,48 וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן שֶׁלֹּא נִתְבַּטְּלָה שְׂכִירוּת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה.קד וְהוּא הַדִּין כָּל עֶבֶד מֵעַבְדֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ הַקְּטַנִּיםקה (שֶׁבְּבֵיתוֹקו) – שׂוֹכְרִים מֵהֶן כְּמוֹ שֶׁשּׂוֹכְרִים מִשְׂכִּירוֹ וּלְקִיטוֹ שֶׁל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת49 (וְהוּא הַדִּין שֶׁשּׂוֹכְרִים מֵעַבְדֵי עֲבָדָיו, כְּמוֹ שֶׁשּׂוֹכְרִים מִשְּׂכִירוֹ שֶׁל שְׂכִירוֹקז):49

18 When a non-Jew [employs] five Jews as workers or harvest help [and] they live in his courtyard, each one in a separate room or home, they do not cause each other to be forbidden [to carry],50 since their dwellings are not their own, but rather belong to the non-Jew. [The non-Jew] may send [the Jewish employees] away [at any time], and he does not lend them the domains in a manner that [the Jews] cause each other to be forbidden [to carry], as stated in sec. 370[:5]. The dwellings [of the Jewish employees] are considered as [significant] dwellings only for the sake of leniency – that [the Jewish employees] may rent out [the non-Jew’s property] without his consent, but not for the sake of stringency, that [the Jews] cause each other to be forbidden [to carry].

Similarly, if [other residents of the courtyard] rented the non-Jew’s rights, none of [his five Jewish workers] are required to contribute to the eruv.51 (How much more so [does this apply] if [the other residents of the courtyard] rented the rights of the non-Jew, for then, the dwellings [of the Jewish workers] are included [in the arrangement].)

יח נָכְרִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ ה' יִשְׂרְאֵלים שְׂכִירִים וּלְקִיטִיםקח דָּרִים בַּחֲצֵרוֹ, כָּל אֶחָד בְּחֶדֶר אוֹ בַּיִת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ – אֵינָן אוֹסְרִים זֶה עַל זֶה,קט,50 כֵּיוָן שֶׁאֵין דִּירָתָם שֶׁלָּהֶםקי אֶלָּא שֶׁל הַנָּכְרִי, וְהוּא יָכוֹל לְסַלְּקָם,קיא וְאֵינוֹ מַשְׁאִיל לָהֶם רְשׁוּתָם שֶׁיַּאַסְרוּ זֶה עַל זֶה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"ע.קיב וְאֵין דִּירָתָם חֲשׁוּבָה דִירָהקיג אֶלָּא לְהָקֵל, שֶׁיְּכוֹלִים לְהַשְׂכִּיר שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ, אֲבָל לֹא לְהַחֲמִיר,קיד שֶׁיַּאַסְרוּ זֶה עַל זֶה.

וְכֵן אִם שָׂכְרוּ מִן הַנָּכְרִי רְשׁוּתוֹ – אֵין שׁוּם אֶחָד מֵהֶם צָרִיךְ לִתֵּן עֵרוּבקטו,51 (וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן אִם הֵם הִשְׂכִּירוּ רְשׁוּת הַנָּכְרִי,קטז שֶׁהֲרֵי גַּם דִּירָתָם בִּכְלָל):

19 When a non-Jew rents his house to another non-Jew, as long as the owner retains any [sort of] rights to his house, [e.g.,] he may deposit any [kind of] article52 there, [the Jews living in the courtyard] may rent [the rights from the owner].53 Indeed, this [ruling] does not apply to the owner alone. Instead, one may rent [such rights] from any person who has rights to the non-Jew’s house, [e.g.,] he may deposit any [kind of] article [in the house that has been rented out], because he is considered as [the non-Jewish homeowner’s] worker or harvest help, as explained.54 The Sages [mentioned a situation regarding an owner only] because they were speaking about the most common occurrence, for it can be assumed that when an owner rents out [his domain], he retains the right to deposit articles there.55

[Different rules apply,] however, if the owner did not retain any rights to his house. If the owner can send the tenant away from his home in the middle of the term of the rental, it is possible to rent [the rights] from [the owner]. If not, [renting from the owner] is not effective, and it is necessary to rent [the rights directly] from the tenant.

יט נָכְרִי שֶׁהִשְׂכִּיר בֵּיתוֹ לְנָכְרִי אַחֵר,קיז אִם נִשְׁאַר לוֹ לַמַּשְׂכִּיר רְשׁוּת בְּבֵיתוֹ שֶׁיּוּכַל לְהַנִּיחַ בּוֹ שׁוּם כֵּלִים52 – יְכוֹלִים לִשְׂכּוֹר מִמֶּנּוּ.קיח,53 וְלֹא מַשְׂכִּיר בִּלְבָד אֶלָּא כָּל אָדָם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ רְשׁוּת בְּבֵית נָכְרִי לְהַנִּיחַ בּוֹ שׁוּם דָּבָר יָכוֹל לִשְׂכּוֹר מִמֶּנּוּ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשֶׂה כִּשְׂכִירוֹ וּלְקִיטוֹקיט כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר.קכ,54 אֶלָּא שֶׁדִּבְרוּ חֲכָמִים בַּהֹ וֶה, שֶׁסְּתָם מַשְׂכִּיר מַשְׁאִיר לוֹ רְשׁוּת בְּבֵיתוֹ לְהַנִּיחַ בּוֹ חֲפָצָיו.55

אֲבָל אִם לֹא נִשְׁאַר לוֹ רְשׁוּת בְּבֵיתוֹ, אִם יָכוֹל הַמַּשְׂכִּיר לְסַלֵּק אֶת הַשּׂוֹכֵר מִבֵּיתוֹ תּוֹךְ זְמַנּוֹ – יְכוֹלִים לִשְׂכּוֹר מִמֶּנּוּ, וְאִם לָאו – אֵינוֹ מוֹעִיל אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן יִשְׂכְּרוּ מֵהַשּׂוֹכֵר:קכא,53

20 When there are two courtyards, one behind the other, and one Jew and one non-Jew [share] the inner courtyard and another Jew lives in the outer [courtyard, the Jew living in] the inner [courtyard] is permitted [to carry] in his courtyard, for [the presence of] a non-Jew does not cause one Jew to be forbidden [to carry.56 However, the non-Jew] does cause [carrying] to be forbidden in the outer [courtyard] unless [the non-Jew] rents (his rights to pass through [the outer courtyard] to [the Jewish residents]).57 ([The rationale is that] two Jews and the non-Jew pass through there.)

Similarly, if one Jew lives in the inner [courtyard] and one Jew and a non-Jew [share] the outer [courtyard], and even if a non-Jew lives in the inner [courtyard] and two Jews [share] the outer [courtyard] and they establish an eruv together, [the presence of] the non-Jew causes [carrying] to be forbidden.58 [This stringency applies] even though were [the resident of the inner courtyard] to have been Jewish, his passage [through the outer courtyard] would not cause [its residents] to be forbidden [to carry], because his would be “the feet [of a person] permitted [to carry] in his place,” [which do not cause carrying to be forbidden in another neighboring place], as explained in sec. 375[:1].59

כ שְׁתֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת זוֹ לִפְנִים מִזּוֹ, וְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֶחָד וְנָכְרִי בַּפְּנִימִית וְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֶחָד בַּחִיצוֹנָה – הַפְּנִימִי מֻתָּר בַּחֲצֵרוֹ,קכב,53 שֶׁאֵין הַנָּכְרִי אוֹסֵר עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל יְחִידִי,קכג,56 אֲבָל בַּחִיצוֹנָה אוֹסֵרקכד הוּא53 עַד שֶׁיַּשְׂכִּירקכה (לָהֶם רְשׁוּת דְּרִיסַת רַגְלוֹ בָּהּקכו),57 (שֶׁהֲרֵי רַגְלֵי ב' יִשְׂרְאֵלִים וְנָכְרִי מְצוּיִים בָּהּקכז). וְכֵן אִם יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶחָד בַּפְּנִימִית וְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֶחָד וְנָכְרִי בַּחִיצוֹנָה.קכח וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם נָכְרִי בַּפְּנִימִית וּב' יִשְׂרְאֵלִים בַּחִיצוֹנָה וְעֵרְבוּ – אוֹסֵר הַנָּכְרִי עֲלֵיהֶם,קכט,58 אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאִם הָיָה יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא הָיָה אוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶם בִּדְרִיסַת רַגְלוֹ, הוֹאִיל וְהִיא רֶגֶל הַמֻּתֶּרֶת בִּמְקוֹמָהּ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן שע"ה:קל,59

21 [Our Sages ruled stringently in the following instance:]60 There was a courtyard in which one Jew and [several] non-Jews lived. There was another house belonging to another Jew next to [the Jew’s] house, but it did not open to the courtyard, only to the house [of the first Jew] via windows, but not through an actual entrance. [The two Jews] may not establish an eruv via the windows61 they share so that [the owner of the second house] could take out his articles to the courtyard via the house that opens to it. [The rationale is that] it is forbidden to help one [Jew] who is living [in the same courtyard] as a non-Jew.62 [As a result, he will leave the courtyard and] not [be influenced by the non-Jew’s] conduct. Therefore, [the Sages] said that no one should establish an eruv with [this Jew] or use his courtyard together with him, so that he will be a single [Jew] in his courtyard and fear the non-Jew lest he kill him. And, [because of his fear, the Jew will] leave that place.

If, however, [the two Jews’ houses] open up to each other via an actual entrance, it is permitted for them to establish an eruv. [The rationale is that] even if [the other Jew] does not establish an eruv with [the Jew who shares the courtyard with the non-Jew], nor use his courtyard, [that Jew] will not fear the non-Jew, because [the non-Jew] will think that [the Jew whose home opens to his courtyard] is living together with the other Jew in [the same] house, since their homes open up to each other with an actual entrance.

כא חָצֵר שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל אֶחָד וְנָכְרִים דָּרִים בָּהּ, וְיֵשׁ בַּיִת אֶחָד שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵצֶל בֵּיתוֹ שֶׁל זֶה, וְאֵינוֹ פָּתוּחַ לְחָצֵר זוֹ אֶלָּא לְבַיִת זֶה הוּא פָּתוּחַ בְּחַלּוֹנוֹת,קלא וְלֹא בְּפֶתַח גָּמוּר – אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְעָרֵב עִמּוֹ60 עַל יְדֵי הַחַלּוֹנוֹת61 שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶם כְּדֵי לְהוֹצִיא כֵּלָיו לְחָצֵר זוֹ דֶּרֶךְ בַּיִת זֶה הַפָּתוּחַ לְחָצֵר זוֹ,קלב לְפִי שֶׁאָסוּר לַעֲשׂוֹת סִיּוּעַ לְיָחִיד שֶׁיָּדוּר עִם נָכְרִי,קלג,62 שֶׁלֹּא יִלְמוֹד מִמַּעֲשָׂיו. לְפִיכָךְ אָמְרוּ שֶׁלֹּא יְעָרֵב זֶה עִמּוֹ וְלֹא יִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ עִמּוֹ בַּחֲצֵרוֹ, כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה יְחִידִי בַּחֲצֵרוֹ וְיִתְיָרֵא מֵהַנָּכְרִי שֶׁלֹּא יַהַרְגֶנּוּ וְיֵצֵא מִשָּׁם.קלד אֲבָל אִם הֵם פְּתוּחִים זֶה לְזֶה בְּפֶתַח גָּמוּר – מֻתָּר לְעָרֵב עִמּוֹ, לְפִי שֶׁאַף אִם לֹא יְעָרֵב עִמּוֹ וְלֹא יִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בַּחֲצֵרוֹ לֹא יִתְיָרֵא מֵהַנָּכְרִי, לְפִי שֶׁנִּרְאֶה לוֹ כְּאִלּוּ דָר עִם יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה בְּבֵיתוֹ, כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּתֵּיהֶם פְּתוּחִים זֶה לְזֶה בְּפֶתַח גָּמוּר:קלה

22 When a courtyard is shared by Jews and a non-Jew, and there are windows that open from one Jew’s house to [that of] another [Jew], and they established an eruv via the windows,63 even though [the Jews] are permitted to transfer [articles] from one house to another via the windows, they are forbidden to transfer [articles] via their entrances64 (that open to the courtyard) because of the non-Jew.65 [The non-Jew’s presence] (causes [carrying] to be forbidden in the courtyard) unless he rents (his rights to the courtyard to [his Jewish neighbors]).66

כב חָצֵר שֶׁיִּשְׂרְאֵלִים וְנָכְרִי שְׁרוּיִים בָּהּ, וְחַלּוֹנוֹת פְּתוּחִים מִבֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה לְבֵית יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה, וְעֵרְבוּ עַל יְדֵי הַחַלּוֹנוֹת שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶם63 – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵם מֻתָּרִים לְהוֹצִיא מִבַּיִת לְבַיִת דֶּרֶךְ הַחַלּוֹנוֹת, הֲרֵי הֵם אֲסוּרִים לְהוֹצִיא דֶּרֶךְ פִּתְחֵיהֶםקלו,64 (הַפְּתוּחִים לֶחָצֵרקלז) מִפְּנֵי הַנָּכְרִי65 (שֶׁאוֹסֵר עֲלֵיהֶם הֶחָצֵרקלח), עַד שֶׁיַּשְׂכִּיר (לָהֶם רְשׁוּתוֹ שֶׁבֶּחָצֵרקלט):66

23 When there are many Jews [traveling on] a ship and each one has a private cabin on the ship, they must establish an eruv together and rent the rights of the non-Jewish owner of the ship. ([This applies] if [the non-Jewish owner] also has a private cabin on the ship and did not grant the Jewish [passengers] permission to deposit anything in his cabin, and he also does not have the right to deposit anything in their cabins. Thus, they are separated one from the other, as explained above.)67

Alternatively, [the Jewish passengers] may include in [the agreement concerning] their rental [of the cabins on] the ship, [a specification covering] rental [of the non-Jewish owner’s rights], that allows for articles to be carried. If, however, [the Jewish passengers] did not explicitly include [the rental of the ship-owner’s rights in their agreement when they paid for their passage], the rental of [their cabins on] the ship is not effective in permitting them to carry, as explained above.68

כג סְפִינָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ יִשְׂרְאֵלִים רַבִּים, וְיֵשׁ לָהֶם בָּתִּים מְיֻחָדִים לְכָל אֶחָד בַּסְּפִינָה – צְרִיכִים לְעָרֵב יַחַדקמ וְלִשְׂכּוֹר רְשׁוּת מִנָּכְרִי בַּעַל הַסְּפִינָהקמא (אִם יֵשׁ גַּם לוֹ בַּיִת מְיֻחָד בַּסְּפִינָה וְלֹא נָתַן רְשׁוּת לְיִשְׂרְאֵלִים אֵלּוּ לְהַנִּיחַ שׁוּם דָּבָר בְּבֵיתוֹ, וְגַם אֵין לוֹ רְשׁוּת לְהַנִּיחַ שׁוּם דָּבָר בְּבָתֵּיהֶם,קמב שֶׁאָז הֵם מְסֻלָּקִים זֶה מִזֶּה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְמַעְלָהקמג),67 אוֹ יַבְלִיעוּ שְׂכִירוּת הֶתֵּר טִלְטוּל בִּשְׂכַר הַסְּפִינָה.קמד אֲבָל אִם לֹא הִבְלִיעוּ לוֹ בְּפֵרוּשׁ – אֵין שְׂכִירוּת הַסְּפִינָה מוֹעֶלֶת לְהַתִּיר טִלְטוּל, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְמַעְלָה:קמה,68