Shabbat 131A

בתים וחצרות פתוחין לתוכו, והכא בתים ⁠— איכא, חצרות ⁠— ליכא. כי לא עירבו נמי, ליחזינהו להני בתים כמאן דסתימי דמו, וחצרות איכא ובתים ⁠— ליכא!

houses and courtyards open to it, and each courtyard contains at least two houses, and there are at least two courtyards. And here, there are houses but there are no courtyards, and therefore the standard halakhot of a closed alleyway do not apply. However, if that is the case, when they did not join the courtyards with the houses too, let us consider these houses as though they were sealed, because their residents may not carry from their houses into the courtyards, and the houses should be considered irrelevant. Therefore, in that case too, there are courtyards but there are no houses.

אפשר דמבטלי ליה רשותא דכולהו לגבי חד. סוף סוף בית איכא בתים ליכא!

The Talmud answers: In that case it is possible for them to renounce all of their property rights and transfer them to one person. Just as the residents of a courtyard can join together, thereby rendering it permitted to carry in the courtyard, they can also relinquish their property rights to a single resident. In that way, it is considered as though there is only one inhabited house in the courtyard, and it is therefore permitted to carry within the courtyard as well as between that particular house and the courtyard. The Talmud rejects this answer: Ultimately, even in that case, there is one house, yet there are not multiple houses, as it is possible to relinquish one’s privileges to only one homeowner and not to two. This would fail to meet the minimum requirement of two houses for the area to be considered a courtyard.

אפשר דמצפרא ועד פלגא דיומא לגבי חד, מפלגיה דיומא ולפניא לגבי חד. סוף סוף בעידנא דאיתיה להאי, ליתיה להאי? אלא אמר רב אשי: מי גרם לחצרות שיאסרו ⁠— בתים, וליכא.

The Talmud answers: It is possible to resolve this: From morning until midday they can relinquish their rights to one, and from midday until evening they can relinquish their rights to another, and as a result there will be two houses. The Talmud rejects this answer: Ultimately, at the time when this house has the ownership rights, that house does not have them, as at any point in time there is only one house from which it is permitted to carry into the courtyard. Rather, Rav Ashi said: The explanation that there are no houses and courtyards here is rejected, and the explanation is: What caused the courtyards to be prohibited? It is the presence of the houses. Had there been no houses, it would have been permitted to carry from the courtyards into the alleyway, since they are one domain according to R' Shimon. And here, it is considered as though there are no houses. Therefore, it is permitted to carry in the alleyway.