Eruvin 71A

אף על פי שהחזיק ישראל אחר בנכסיו ⁠— אוסר. משחשיכה, אף על פי שלא החזיק ישראל אחר ⁠— אינו אוסר.

In such a case, even though a different Jew took possession of the convert’s property, the one who acquires it renders carrying prohibited. If, however, he died after nightfall, even though a different Jew did not take possession of his property, it, i.e., carrying, is not prohibited, for carrying had already been permitted on that Shabbat.

הא גופא קשיא, אמרת: מבעוד יום ⁠— אף על פי שהחזיק, ולא מיבעיא כי לא החזיק. אדרבה, כי לא החזיק לא אסר!

The Talmud raises a difficulty: The baraita itself is difficult. You first said: If the convert died while it was still day, even though a different Jew took possession of his property, the latter renders carrying prohibited, which implies that it is not necessary to say so where another Jew did not take possession of the property, for in such a case it is certainly prohibited. But this is incorrect. On the contrary, in a case where a different person did not take possession of the property, it is certainly not prohibited, for in such a case the convert’s property is ownerless and there is nobody to render carrying in the courtyard prohibited.

אמר רב פפא: אימא: אף על פי שלא החזיק. והא ״אף על פי שהחזיק״ קתני?

Rav Pappa said: Say that the baraita should read as follows: Even though a different Jew did not take possession of it. The Talmud raises a difficulty: How can it be corrected in this manner? But doesn’t it teach: Even though he took possession of it?

הכי קאמר: אף על פי שלא החזיק מבעוד יום אלא משחשיכה, כיון דהוה ליה להחזיק מבעוד יום ⁠— אוסר. משחשיכה, אף על פי שלא החזיק ישראל אחר ⁠— אינו אוסר.

The Talmud answers: This is what the baraita is saying: If the convert died while it was still day, then even though a different Jew did not take possession of the property while it was still day but only after nightfall, since he had the possibility of taking possession of it while it was still day, the person who acquires it renders carrying prohibited. If, however, the convert died after nightfall, even though a different Jew did not take possession of his property, it does not render it prohibited to carry.