Study Eruvin folio 62A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
גמ׳ יתיב אביי בר אבין ורב חיננא בר אבין, ויתיב אביי גבייהו, ויתבי וקאמרי: בשלמא רבי מאיר קסבר דירת גוי שמה דירה, ולא שנא חד ולא שנא תרי.
Talmud: Abaye bar Avin and Rav Ḥinana bar Avin were sitting, and Abaye was sitting beside them, and they sat and said: Granted, the opinion of R' Meir, the author of the unattributed Mishnah, is clear, as he holds that the residence of a non-Jew is considered a significant residence. In other words, the non-Jew living in the courtyard is considered a resident who has a share in the courtyard. Since he cannot join in an eiruv with the Jew, he renders it prohibited for the Jew to carry from his house to the courtyard or from the courtyard to his house. Consequently, the case of one Jew living in the courtyard is no different from the case of two Jews living there. In both cases, the non-Jew renders it prohibited for carrying.
אלא רבי אליעזר בן יעקב מאי קסבר? אי קסבר דירת גוי שמה דירה — אפילו חד נמי ניתסר! ואי לא שמה דירה — אפילו תרי נמי לא ניתסר!
But R' Eliezer ben Ya’akov, what does he hold? If you say he holds that the residence of a non-Jew is considered a significant residence, he should prohibit carrying even when there is only one Jew living in the courtyard. And if it is not considered a significant residence, he should not prohibit carrying even when there are two Jews living there.
אמר להו אביי: וסבר רבי מאיר דירת גוי שמה דירה? והתניא: חצירו של נכרי — הרי הוא כדיר של בהמה.
Abaye said to them: Your basic premise is based on a faulty assumption. Does R' Meir actually hold that the residence of a non-Jew is considered a significant residence? Wasn’t it taught in the Tosefta: The courtyard of a non-Jew is like the pen of an animal, i.e., just as an animal pen does not render it prohibited to carry in a courtyard, so too, the non-Jew’s residence in itself does not impose restrictions on a Jew.