between public, unclaimed, and private ground and ground which was under no particular jurisdiction were strictly drawn. Whatever ground, however, could be made by hook or crook to come under the category of private ground was eagerly included, as in the latter things could be carried about at will. In order, therefore, to have as much private ground as possible, each man having an interest in public ground would relinquish or transfer his right to his neighbor and thus make it communal or private property. Of course, this could be done only among Israelites, and where a Gentile had an interest in a piece of coveted ground, his share had to be bought outright.
It was this desire to be in the same neighborhood, yea, even on the same grounds, that laid the foundation of the subsequent Ghettos, still flourishing in most of the large cities of the world. How this communal living was fostered may be readily understood, when it is stated that the sages permitted the execution of a written instrument in Palestine an the Sabbath, under ordinary circumstances a grave offence, where a piece of property had to be purchased from a Gentile for communal purposes. (See Gitin, 8b, and Schulchan Aruch Orach Chaym, 306, §11.)
The name of this Tract may be said to have a certain significance. The Hebrew word "Erub" has a variety of meanings, among them "commixture," as stated, "agreeable," "secure," and "safeguard." As the discussions in the Tract will demonstrate, either one of these meanings may be applied to the appellation of the Tract and still express the purpose of the laws ordained. By those laws the observance of the Sabbath was made "secure," they proved a "safeguard" against "amalgamation" or "mingling" with other nations, and by virtue of the modification to the laws of Sabbath which was brought about, the observance of the Sabbath was made more "agreeable." Several other meanings might be utilized in the same manner, but lest they seem far-fetched they are omitted.
Another peculiarity of this Tract is that under no circumstances and on no occasion is the derivation of a law enacted in this particular Tract inquired into, and unlike other tracts there will not be found a single query as to where the Mishna derives the law. For want of other sources the institution of the Erub has been attributed to King Solomon, vide page 51.
The main subjects of discussion in the following pages will be how this Erub shall be effected, what materials shall be used to bring about a commixture, how entries (by which is meant the entry to a court or a yard where an aggregation of families reside) are to be arranged, and the like.
Altogether there are four kinds of Erubin, only three of which will be discussed in this treatise. They are: The combining of courts, the combining of limits, and the combining of streets, also known as junction. The other commixture is called combining of cookery, which will be treated at length in Tract Yom Tob. The combining of courts deals with the regulations by the observance of which various houses standing in one court are joined together into one common ground, thus enabling the householders to carry and convey articles to and from one another. The combining of limits treats of the regulations through which the distance of two thousand ells, beyond which no Israelite is allowed to travel on the Sabbath, may be legally extended.
The combining of streets treats of the rules to be observed in the case of narrow streets and public places which can be turned into private ground under certain conditions.
Finally, it may be well to add that, of all the difficult and complicated treatises in the Talmud, the Tract Erubin is by far the most difficult, and in a great many places almost incomprehensible to other than the most careful students.
THE EDITOR.
NEW YORK, September, 1897.
SYNOPSIS OF SUBJECTS OF VOLUME III.--TRACT ERUBIN 1
CHAPTER I.
MISHNA I. treats: If an entry be higher than twenty ells. The size of the height is based upon the door and the porch of the pillars of the temple, or palaces of kings. If the cross-beam was partly above twenty ells, and partly below. The ell used at a booth and an entry measures five spans, but the ell used at Kilaim is six spans. The several prescribed quantities, the intervention of articles, and the ordinances concerning the walls of entries and booths were given by Moses at the Mount Sinai, and also Gud, Lavud, and crooked walls. About Kal Vochomer (à fortiori), which comes very often in the Talmud. The people there were ignorant, and had to be given a liberal interpretation of the ordinance. How must entries facing public around be combined by an Erub? May the rigorous ordinances of two Tanaim be applied to one case? What was decided about a village of a shepherd, where was an entry which opened into a vacant yard. May the space underneath the cross-beam be used? The law about an entry which was provided with a number of side-beams (with the illustration). The law about a missing portion of the wall, perceptible from the inside or from the outside (with their illustrations). Whether an entry measuring twenty ells could be reduced to thirteen and a third if built as illustrated? What R. Jehudah taught to R. Hyya, the son of Rabh, and how Rabh corrected. How an apparent door is to be made, 1-22
MISHNA II. What is required to legalize the carrying within an entry. Flow the sages were very lenient with all things pertaining to water. Whether water may be taken from an arm of the sea which enters a court yard. There is a tradition about an entry that can be legalized by a side or cross beam. Why was Rabbi, or Rabh, more sagacious than his colleagues? Wily were the school of Hillel favored? Because modest. Two years the schools of Shammai and Hillel disputed whether it were better that man had not been created as he was, 22-28
MISHNA III. The cross-beam must be wide enough to hold a half of a brick. About a cross-beam put up over an entry but not reaching the opposite wall. Anything measuring three spans in circumference is one hand in width, 28-31
MISHNAS IV., V., VI., and VII. The height and thickness of the side beam. How much is meant by thickness "whatever it may"? About a side-beam standing of itself. There was a pillar about which Abayi and Rabha differed all their lives. Side-beams may be made out of anything. Every open space ten spans wide may be used as an entry. The open space must not exceed in extent the fence proper. How can it be that there should be a contradiction and still the Halakha should prevail according to it? A fence may also be constructed with three ropes, or with cane-laths. Any partition not constructed on the principle of warp and shoot, whether it is a partition? I swear by the law of Moses, and by the prophets, and by the Hagiographa, that Rabh said this. It makes absolutely no difference, be it a caravan or an individual, in an inhabited place or in the desert. The four privileges granted to warriors in the camp, 31-39
CHAPTER II.
MISHNA I. How enclosures are to be made around wells (and illustrations.) To make an enclosure around a well of rain-water is permitted only to the pilgrims to Jerusalem. Adam, the first man, had a dual face. The Lord was sponsor to him. The fires of hell cannot gain access to the bodies of the sinners of Israel; Abraham the patriarch, seeing that they are circumcised, rescues them. How much in size must the larger part of a cow be reckoned? May things be carried from a courtyard opening into the enclosure around a well, and vice versa? I have heard that ye go to the Synagogue of Daniel on the Sabbath; upon what grounds do ye do this? In the time that Solomon the king ordained the law of Erubin, a heavenly voice was heard. Solomon said three thousand proverbs for every one of the biblical commandments. The commandments are to be fulfilled to-day, and the rewards will be in the world to come. If a public thoroughfare passes through an enclosure. The paths by which the mountains of Palestine are ascended do not come under the head of public ground, 40-55
MISHNAS II. and III. An enclosure of boards must be made only for a public well. The difference in the opinions of R. Jehudah b. Babah, R. Aqiba, R. Eliezer, and R. Jose, about a garden or woodshed over seventy ells square. How can one hundred ells in length by fifty by fifty in breadth (Ex. xxvii. 18) be understood? If a woodshed of more than two saahs' capacity was fenced in for a dwelling. In a bleaching-ground (behind a house) things must not be carried except for a distance of four ells. What was done by R.