✦ ❖ ✦
DAAT · LEVEL 1 — INTRODUCTION
Siman שפ״א · 7 seifim of the Shulchan Aruch
One who renounced his domain and then carried anyway; the forms of renunciation — to discover and understand
סימן שפ״א
דיני המבטל רשותו ועבר והוציא
🌱 Beginner Level · מתחילים
✦ ❖ ✦
First approach to Siman שפ״א: complete Hebrew text of the Mechaber and of the gloss of the Rema, English translation, pedagogical explanations of the halachic concepts, practical cases and synthesis.
Topic: the renunciation of domain (bitul reshus) — one who renounced and then carried anyway, then renunciation from courtyard to courtyard, for a ruin, from house to house, the case where one cannot renounce, the heir, and renouncing back
Source: שולחן ערוך אורח חיים סימן שפ״א (7 seifim in the Shulchan Aruch, with a gloss of the Rema in seif ד; 7 in the Shulchan Aruch HaRav as well, studied at Level 4, which explains how Sefaria's text divides them)
Compiled by: רב יוסף חיים סממה
DAAT · daattorah.com
📑 Study Plan
1. The Shulchan Aruch text — the 7 seifim of the Mechaber, with the gloss of the Rema
2. General context: why this siman, what is the question?
3. Key halachic concepts of this siman
4. Detail of the seifim — one by one
5. The Mishnah Berurah — first entries
6. Position of the Rema — his gloss in seif ד, and the reservations of the commentators
7. Modern practical cases
8. Practical synthesis and rules to remember
9. Comprehension questions
1. The Shulchan Aruch text
Siman שפ״א contains 7 seifim of the Mechaber (Rabbi Yosef Karo); the Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) adds one gloss, in seif ד. Topic of the siman, according to its title: the laws of one who renounced his domain, then transgressed and carried — and, from seif ב on, the forms of renunciation of domain (bitul reshus). The Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe also has 7 seifim for this siman: its numbering is that of Level 4, not that of this page, and Level 4 explains how the text Sefaria serves divides them.
Seif א
דיני המבטל רשותו ועבר והוציא. ובו ז סעיפים:
המבטל רשותו והוציא אח״כ מביתו לחצר בשוגג אינו אוסר במזיד אוסר שהרי חוזר מביטולו שביטל ואם החזיקו בו כבר שהוציאו מבתיהם לחצר או שהכניסו מחצר לבתיהם אינו יכול לחזור מביטולו ולרש״י אין חזקה מועלת אלא אם כן החזיקו משחשיכה:
Translation: One who renounced his domain (mevatel reshuso) and afterwards carried from his house to the courtyard: unwittingly (b'shogeg), he does not forbid; deliberately (b'meizid), he forbids [the residents of the courtyard to carry — Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק ב], for he is going back on the renunciation he made. And if they had already taken possession (hechezikku) of it — if they carried from their houses to the courtyard, or brought [things] in from the courtyard to their houses — he can no longer go back on his renunciation. And according to Rashi, taking possession (chazakah) is effective only if they took possession after nightfall.
What this seif says:
- After renouncing, he carries from his house to the courtyard: unwittingly he does not forbid, deliberately he forbids: המבטל רשותו והוציא אח״כ מביתו לחצר בשוגג אינו אוסר במזיד אוסר שהרי חוזר מביטולו שביטל. According to the Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק ג), he appears to be going back and retaking possession of the domain he renounced; and if he afterwards renounces anew, it helps. It quotes the Magen Avraham that only carrying from the house to the courtyard looks like such a return, not bringing in from the courtyard to the house, and refers to siman 380, where it wrote that several poskim dispute this and do not distinguish between carrying out and bringing in.
- If they have already taken possession, he can no longer go back on his renunciation: ואם החזיקו בו כבר שהוציאו מבתיהם לחצר או שהכניסו מחצר לבתיהם אינו יכול לחזור מביטולו. According to the Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק ה), taking possession is effective for acquisition everywhere; although this is not a complete taking of possession, the Sages were lenient and let it work like other acts of possession; and according to this view it works even if done on Erev Shabbos, after the renunciation.
- According to Rashi, only taking possession after nightfall works: ולרש״י אין חזקה מועלת אלא אם כן החזיקו משחשיכה. For, as the Mishnah Berurah explains (ס״ק ו), while it is still day nothing is proven: even without renunciation one may then carry out and bring in; and it refers to the Biur Halachah, which writes that there is reason to be stringent according to this view (section 6).
Seif ב
יש ביטול רשות מחצר לחצר לא שנא שתי חצירו' ופתח ביניהן ועירבה כל אחת לעצמה ולא עירבו יחד יכול כל א' לבטל רשותו לחברת' להיות' מותר' להשתמש בה ולא היא לא שנא שתי חצירו' זו לפנים מזו ולא עירבו אלא החיצונה לבדה שפנימי' אוסרה על החיצונה יכולה לבטל לה רשות' שלא תשתמש ולא תעבור עליה אלא בשעה שצריכה לצאת ותהיה החיצונה מותר' או אם עירבו יחד ונתנו עירובן בחיצונה ושכח א' מהפנימי' ולא עירב יכול לבטל רשותו דהיינו שיבטל רשותו לכל א' מבני הפנימי' וגם לכל א' מבני החיצונה ויהיה הוא לבדו אסור וכולם מותרים:
Translation: There is renunciation of domain from one courtyard to another: whether two courtyards with an opening between them, where each made the eruv for itself and they did not make the eruv together — each may renounce its domain to the other, so that [the other] is permitted to use it, and not itself; or two courtyards, one inside the other, where only the outer one made the eruv — the inner one forbidding [carrying] to the outer —, [the inner one] may renounce its domain to it, so as not to use it and not to pass through it except when it needs to go out, and the outer one will be permitted; or, if they made the eruv together and placed their eruv in the outer one, and one of the inner one forgot and did not make the eruv, he may renounce his domain — that is, he renounces his domain to each of the residents of the inner one and also to each of the residents of the outer one —, and he alone will be forbidden, and all will be permitted.
What this seif says:
- There is renunciation from one courtyard to another: יש ביטול רשות מחצר לחצר.
- Two courtyards with an opening between them, each having made its eruv: לא שנא שתי חצירו׳ ופתח ביניהן ועירבה כל אחת לעצמה ולא עירבו יחד יכול כל א׳ לבטל רשותו לחברת׳ להיות׳ מותר׳ להשתמש בה ולא היא. Had they not each made the eruv for itself, one could not renounce: as explained in siman 380, one does not renounce to two [who did not make the eruv], each forbidding the other (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק ח). Those who renounced are afterwards forbidden to carry from their houses to the courtyard (ס״ק י).
- Two courtyards, one inside the other, only the outer one having made the eruv: לא שנא שתי חצירו׳ זו לפנים מזו ולא עירבו אלא החיצונה לבדה שפנימי׳ אוסרה על החיצונה יכולה לבטל לה רשות׳ שלא תשתמש ולא תעבור עליה אלא בשעה שצריכה לצאת ותהיה החיצונה מותר׳. The inner one is then, according to the Mishnah Berurah, a foot (regel) forbidden in its place, which forbids outside its place (ס״ק י״ב, referring to siman 378); and passing through forbids only together with use (ס״ק י״ג).
- A joint eruv placed in the outer one; one of the inner one forgot: או אם עירבו יחד ונתנו עירובן בחיצונה ושכח א׳ מהפנימי׳ ולא עירב יכול לבטל רשותו דהיינו שיבטל רשותו לכל א׳ מבני הפנימי׳ וגם לכל א׳ מבני החיצונה ויהיה הוא לבדו אסור וכולם מותרים. The same applies, writes the Mishnah Berurah, if the eruv was placed in the inner one: the one of the inner one must still renounce to both courtyards (ס״ק י״ד); and he alone is forbidden means to carry from his house to the courtyard (ס״ק ט״ז).
Seif ג
יש ביטול רשות בחורבה שאם היו שני בתים וחורב' ביניהם שהיא של שניהם ושכחו ולא עירבו יכול אחד לבטל רשותו לחבירו ולהיותו מותר בו:
Translation: There is renunciation of domain for a ruin (churvah): if there were two houses, and between them a ruin belonging to both, and they forgot and did not make the eruv, one may renounce his domain to the other, so that he is permitted in it.
What this seif says:
- There is renunciation for a ruin: יש ביטול רשות בחורבה. We do not say that the Sages allowed renunciation only for the courtyard in front of the houses, where their main use is (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק י״ז).
- A ruin between two houses, belonging to both: שאם היו שני בתים וחורב׳ ביניהם שהיא של שניהם ושכחו ולא עירבו יכול אחד לבטל רשותו לחבירו ולהיותו מותר בו. On belonging to both, the Mishnah Berurah refers to siman 376 (ס״ק י״ח).
Seif ד
יש ביטול רשות מבית לבית שאם היו שני בתים ופתח ביניהם ולא עירבו א' מבטל רשות לחבירו ואפי' המבטל מותר להוציא מביתו לבי' חבירו אבל אינו יכול להוציא מבי' חבירו לביתו שאז היה חוזר ומחזיק ברשו' שביטל וכן אם יש לו חדר פתוח לביתו וביטל רשו' ביתו אסור להוציא מהחדר לביתו: הגה וי״א דאין לבטל מבית לבית אלא אם כן ישאיר לעצמו חדר אחד שלא ביטל ואז מותר להכניס אפילו מבית חבירו לביתו וטוב להחמיר לכתחילה (ב״י בשם רבינו ירוחם ור״ת והגהות מיימוני פ״ב מהלכות עירובין):
Translation: There is renunciation of domain from one house to another: if there were two houses with an opening between them and they did not make the eruv, one renounces his domain to the other; and even the one who renounces is permitted to carry from his house to the other's house; but he may not carry from the other's house to his house, for then he would be going back and retaking possession of the domain he renounced. And likewise, if he has a room open to his house and renounced the domain of his house, he is forbidden to carry from the room to his house. Gloss of the Rema: and some say that one does not renounce from house to house unless he keeps for himself one room that he did not renounce; and then it is permitted to bring [things] in even from the other's house to his house; and it is good to be stringent a priori [the Rema's references, as printed: ב״י בשם רבינו ירוחם ור״ת והגהות מיימוני פ״ב מהלכות עירובין].
What this seif says:
- There is renunciation from one house to another: יש ביטול רשות מבית לבית שאם היו שני בתים ופתח ביניהם ולא עירבו א׳ מבטל רשות לחבירו. Just as renunciation works from courtyard to courtyard (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק י״ט).
- The one who renounces may carry from his house to the other's: ואפי׳ המבטל מותר להוציא מביתו לבי׳ חבירו. For everything belongs to the other, since he renounced to him, and this even before the other took possession of his house (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ).
- But not from the other's house to his own: אבל אינו יכול להוציא מבי׳ חבירו לביתו שאז היה חוזר ומחזיק ברשו׳ שביטל. The Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק כ״א) gives as the reason that an individual in relation to an individual is not a guest, so that it is forbidden even if the other took possession; the Biur Halachah then writes that it followed the Magen Avraham there, and that it rather reads in the words of Tosafos, the Rosh and the Or Zarua that the prohibition applies even to an individual who renounced to many, when he brings back into his house the very objects he had carried into the other's house after his renunciation (section 6).
- The room open to his house: וכן אם יש לו חדר פתוח לביתו וביטל רשו׳ ביתו אסור להוציא מהחדר לביתו. And likewise from the house to his room, writes the Mishnah Berurah, for it is like carrying from one domain to another; and it quotes Acharonim that even if he expressly renounced the domain of his room as well, it is forbidden to carry from one to the other (ס״ק כ״ב).
- Gloss of the Rema: some say one renounces from house to house only by keeping a room: וי״א דאין לבטל מבית לבית אלא אם כן ישאיר לעצמו חדר אחד שלא ביטל ואז מותר להכניס אפילו מבית חבירו לביתו. The reason, according to the Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק כ״ג): the concern that the law of eruv be forgotten, if all renounced to one and each carried from his house to the other's; by keeping a room, from which he is forbidden to carry to the house, the one who renounces still gains from the eruv. On then it is permitted to bring in, see section 6.
- Gloss of the Rema: the conclusion: וטוב להחמיר לכתחילה.
Seif ה
שני בתים בשני צדי רה״ר והקיפום עכו״ם מחיצה בשבת בענין שיש ביניהם כמו חצר ששני בתים פתוחים לו והרי הם אוסרים זה על זה אינם יכולים לבטל א' לחבירו:
Translation: Two houses on the two sides of the public domain (reshus harabim), which non-Jews (akum) surrounded with a partition on Shabbos, so that there is between them something like a courtyard onto which two houses open, and they forbid [carrying] to each other: they cannot renounce one to the other.
What this seif says:
- Two houses surrounded by a partition on Shabbos: שני בתים בשני צדי רה״ר והקיפום עכו״ם מחיצה בשבת בענין שיש ביניהם כמו חצר ששני בתים פתוחים לו והרי הם אוסרים זה על זה.
- They cannot renounce one to the other: אינם יכולים לבטל א׳ לחבירו. The reason, according to the Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק כ״ה): since they could not make the eruv together while it was still day, we say that what was forbidden for part of Shabbos is forbidden for all of Shabbos, and renunciation does not help.
Seif ו
יורש מבטל רשות שאם לא עירב מורישו ומת בשבת והיורש בא לדור בחצר ואוסר יכול לבטל רשותו:
Translation: An heir renounces domain: if the one he inherits from did not make the eruv and died on Shabbos, and the heir comes to live in the courtyard and forbids, he may renounce his domain.
What this seif says:
- The heir who comes to live in the courtyard on Shabbos: שאם לא עירב מורישו ומת בשבת והיורש בא לדור בחצר ואוסר. If he does not come to live there, he does not forbid, for a dwelling without an owner is not a dwelling — the Mishnah Berurah refers to siman 371 (ס״ק כ״ו).
- He may renounce his domain: יכול לבטל רשותו. Although, had he wished to make the eruv the day before, he could not have, his renunciation works, because the heir is like the extension of his father (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ז).
Seif ז
מבטלין וחוזרין ומבטלין כלומר שמבטלין רשותם בני חצר זו לבני חצר אחרת או לאחד מבני חצר עד שיוציאו מה שירצו וחוזרים ומבטלים לאותם שביטלו להם עד שיוציאו גם הם מה שירצו:
Translation: One renounces, and renounces back (mevatlin v'chozrin u'mevatlin): that is, the residents of this courtyard renounce their domain to the residents of another courtyard, or to one of the residents of the courtyard, until [these] have carried what they want; and [these] renounce back to those who had renounced to them, until they too carry what they want.
What this seif says:
- One renounces, and renounces back: מבטלין וחוזרין ומבטלין כלומר שמבטלין רשותם בני חצר זו לבני חצר אחרת או לאחד מבני חצר עד שיוציאו מה שירצו.
- Those who received the renunciation give it back, so that the first ones may carry in turn: וחוזרים ומבטלים לאותם שביטלו להם עד שיוציאו גם הם מה שירצו. Without this return, writes the Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק כ״ח), those who had renounced would not be permitted to carry, even if they had also renounced their houses, since they are many and do not become guests (referring to siman 380). The Magen Avraham, whom it cites, writes that this is not the view of the Beis Yosef (ס״ק ט).
2. General context
What does this siman discuss?
Siman 380 set out the renunciation of domain: of the resident of the courtyard who forgot to make the eruv with the others, it writes « מה תקנתם יבטל להם רשותו » (שו״ע או״ח ש״פ:א). Siman שפ״א continues its laws: what happens when the one who renounced carries anyway (seif א), then renunciation from courtyard to courtyard (seif ב), for a ruin (seif ג), from house to house (seif ד), the case where one cannot renounce (seif ה), the heir (seif ו), and renouncing back (seif ז).
The mishnah in tractate Eruvin records a dispute about one who renounced and carried: « מִי שֶׁנָּתַן רְשׁוּתוֹ וְהוֹצִיא, בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד — הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹסֵר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: בְּמֵזִיד אוֹסֵר, בְּשׁוֹגֵג אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר » (עירובין ס״ט ע״ב). The Beit Yosef, on the Tur of this siman, writes: « ופסק כר׳ יהודה וכן פסקו הפוסקים » (בית יוסף או״ח שפ״א). On the courtyard and the ruin, the Gemara records that Shmuel denies renunciation from courtyard to courtyard and for a ruin, and that Rabbi Yochanan says: « וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: יֵשׁ בִּיטּוּל רְשׁוּת מֵחָצֵר לְחָצֵר, וְיֵשׁ בִּיטּוּל רְשׁוּת בְּחוּרְבָּה » (עירובין ס״ו ע״ב); the Beit Yosef writes: « ופסק הרא״ש כר״י דאמר הכי » (בית יוסף או״ח שפ״א).
The case of seif ה is a question in the Gemara: « בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב חִסְדָּא מֵרַב שֵׁשֶׁת: שְׁנֵי בָתִּים מִשְּׁנֵי צִידֵּי רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים וּבָאוּ גּוֹיִם וְהִקִּיפוּם מְחִיצָה בְּשַׁבָּת, מַהוּ » (עירובין ס״ז ע״א), to which Rav Sheshet answers: « אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֵין מְבַטְּלִין » (עירובין ס״ז ע״א). So is that of seif ו: « בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רָבָא מֵרַב נַחְמָן: יוֹרֵשׁ מַהוּ שֶׁיְּבַטֵּל רְשׁוּת » (עירובין ע׳ ע״א); the question raises, among other things, « אוֹ דִּלְמָא: יוֹרֵשׁ כַּרְעֵיהּ דַּאֲבוּהּ הוּא » (עירובין ע׳ ע״ב), and Rav Nachman answers: « אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנִי אוֹמֵר מְבַטֵּל, וְהָנֵי דְּבֵי שְׁמוּאֵל תָּנוּ אֵין מְבַטֵּל » (עירובין ע׳ ע״ב). Finally, the wording of seif ז is that of Rav, in a dispute with Shmuel: « גּוּפָא, רַב אָמַר: מְבַטְּלִין וְחוֹזְרִין וּמְבַטְּלִין, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אֵין מְבַטְּלִין וְחוֹזְרִין וּמְבַטְּלִין » (עירובין ס״ח ע״ב).
The fundamental question: may one who renounced his domain to the other residents still make use of it, and in what forms does renunciation work? The siman answers, among other things, according to whether the one who renounced carried unwittingly or deliberately, and whether the others had already taken possession of the domain (seif א); according to whether the renunciation is from courtyard to courtyard (seif ב), for a ruin (seif ג) or from house to house (seif ד); and in cases where one could not make the eruv while it was still day (seif ה; for the heir of seif ו, Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ז).
Place in Hilchos Eruvin
In Sefaria's index, the section הלכות עירובין of the Shulchan Aruch begins at siman 345. Siman שפ״א follows siman ש״פ · 380, whose title, at the head of its seif א, is « דיני ביטול רשות » (שו״ע או״ח ש״פ:א), and precedes siman שפ״ב · 382, on the dwelling of a non-Jew, whose title, at the head of its seif א, is « אם דירת עכו״ם מעכב׳ בעירובו » (שו״ע או״ח שפ״ב:א). The Mishnah Berurah refers here, among others, to siman 380 (ס״ק ג, ח, ט״ז, כ׳, כ״א, כ״ח), siman 378 (ס״ק י״ב), siman 376 (ס״ק י״ח) and siman 371 (ס״ק כ״ו).
3. Key halachic concepts
A few notions structure this siman:
The essential notions of siman שפ״א:
- ביטול רשות — renunciation of domain: the resident of the courtyard who did not make the eruv gives the others his right in the courtyard (siman 380, seif א). Siman שפ״א also sets it out from courtyard to courtyard (seif ב), for a ruin (seif ג) and from house to house (seif ד).
- חוזר ומחזיק — going back and retaking possession: one who renounced and deliberately carries from his house to the courtyard, « שנראה כחוזר ומחזיק ברשות שביטל » (משנה ברורה שפ״א ס״ק ג); and it adds: « ומ״מ אם חוזר אח״כ ומבטל מחדש מהני » (משנה ברורה שפ״א ס״ק ג).
- חזקה — taking possession by those to whom one renounced, by carrying out or bringing in (seif א): « דבכל מקום חזקה מועילה בקניה » (משנה ברורה שפ״א ס״ק ה).
- אורח — the guest: to explain seif ד, the Mishnah Berurah writes « ויחיד לגבי יחיד לא הוי אורח » (משנה ברורה שפ״א ס״ק כ״א); the Biur Halachah discusses this reason (section 6).
- תורת עירוב — the law of eruv, which the view quoted by the Rema fears may be forgotten (seif ד): « לפי שיש לחוש שלא תשתכח תורת עירוב » (משנה ברורה שפ״א ס״ק כ״ג).
- נאסר למקצת השבת — forbidden for part of Shabbos: the reason of seif ה, « כיון שנאסר למקצת השבת נאסר לכל השבת ולא מהני בטול » (משנה ברורה שפ״א ס״ק כ״ה).
- יורש — the heir, who may renounce (seif ו): « משום דיורש כרעיה דאבוה הוא » (משנה ברורה שפ״א ס״ק כ״ז).
4. Detail of the seifim — one by one
| Seif | Content |
|---|---|
| א | One who renounced his domain and afterwards carries from his house to the courtyard: unwittingly, he does not forbid; deliberately, he forbids, for he is going back on his renunciation. If the others had already taken possession, by carrying from their houses to the courtyard or bringing in from the courtyard to their houses, he can no longer go back on his renunciation. According to Rashi, taking possession works only after nightfall. |
| ב | There is renunciation from courtyard to courtyard: two courtyards with an opening between them, each having made its eruv, without a joint eruv — each may renounce to the other; two courtyards, one inside the other, only the outer one having made the eruv — the inner one may renounce to it, passing through it only when it needs to go out; a joint eruv placed in the outer one, one of the inner one having forgotten — he renounces to each of the residents of both courtyards, and he alone is forbidden. |
| ג | There is renunciation for a ruin belonging to the two houses between which it lies, when they forgot to make the eruv: one renounces to the other. |
| ד | There is renunciation from house to house, with an opening between them, without an eruv: the one who renounces may carry from his house to the other's, but not from the other's house to his own; if he has a room open to his house and renounced his house, he may not carry from the room to his house. Rema: some say one renounces from house to house only by keeping a room, and then it is permitted to bring in even from the other's house to his own; it is good to be stringent a priori. |
| ה | Two houses on the two sides of the public domain, which non-Jews surrounded with a partition on Shabbos, so that they forbid each other: they cannot renounce one to the other. |
| ו | The heir: if the one he inherits from did not make the eruv and died on Shabbos, and the heir comes to live in the courtyard and forbids, he may renounce his domain. |
| ז | One renounces, and renounces back: the residents of a courtyard renounce to those of another courtyard, or to one of the residents of the courtyard, until these have carried what they want; then these renounce back, so that the first ones may carry in turn. |
The heart of the siman: even after renunciation, there remains the question of what the one who renounced then does. If he deliberately carries from his house to the courtyard, he forbids, unless the others have already taken possession — according to Rashi, whom the seif reports, only after nightfall (seif א); in renunciation from house to house, according to the Mechaber, he may carry from his house to the other's, but not the reverse (seif ד; for the view the Rema quotes, section 6). Renunciation works from courtyard to courtyard (seif ב), for a ruin (seif ג) and for the heir (seif ו), and it can go and come back (seif ז); it does not work where one could not make the eruv while it was still day (seif ה; Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ה), but the heir does renounce (seif ו; Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ז).
5. The Mishnah Berurah — first entries
The Mishnah Berurah of Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan (Chafetz Chaim) has 28 entries on this siman. Here are the first six, on seif א — to better understand the meaning of the text:
משנה ברורה (א) — (א) והוציא אח״כ - פי' שעבר והוציא:
משנה ברורה (ב) — (ב) במזיד אוסר - על בני החצר לטלטל:
משנה ברורה (ג) — (ג) שהרי חוזר וכו' - שנראה כחוזר ומחזיק ברשות שביטל. ומ״מ אם חוזר אח״כ ומבטל מחדש מהני. כתב המג״א דלא אמרינן שהוא כחוזר ומחזיק אלא ע״י הוצאה מבית לחצר אבל אם מכניס מחצר לבית לא נראה כרוצה לחזור מביטולו ולהחזיק בחצר וכבר כתבנו לעיל סי' ש״פ ס״ק ט״ז שכמה פוסקים חולקים ע״ז וס״ל דאין חילוק בין הוצאה להכנסה וכמו דלא מחלקינן בין הוצאה להכנסה לענין החזיק וכמו שמסיים המחבר:
משנה ברורה (ד) — (ד) ואם החזיקו וכו' - קודם שחזר והוציא כליו:
משנה ברורה (ה) — (ה) אינו יכול לחזור - דבכל מקום חזקה מועילה בקניה ואע״ג שאין זו חזקה גמורה אפ״ה הקילו חכמים בה דמהני כשאר חזקות ולדעה זו מהני חזקה אף אם החזיק בערב שבת אחר הביטול:
משנה ברורה (ו) — (ו) משחשיכה - דמבעוד יום לא מוכחא מילתא שהרי גם בלא ביטול יכולין להוציא ולהכניס ועיין בביאור הלכה שיש להחמיר כדעה זו:
For the full text of the 28 entries, see Sefaria: Mishnah Berurah 381.
6. Position of the Rema
In this siman, the Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles, הגה) has a single gloss, in seif ד, on renunciation from house to house. The commentators also add reservations to the seifim of the Mechaber; here are several, seif by seif.
The gloss of the Rema, and the reservations of the commentators:
- Seif א, Rashi's view — the Biur Halachah writes: « משמע מלשון זה דתופס לעיקר כדעה ראשונה ובאמת צ״ע דדעה ראשונה היא רק דעת הטור » (ביאור הלכה שפ״א); it adds that Rashi's view is not an isolated one, and concludes: « ומה שכתב הב״ח לדחות שיטת רש״י כבר דחו אחרונים דבריו ויש להחמיר » (ביאור הלכה שפ״א).
- Seif ב, one of the outer one forgot — the Biur Halachah: « וה״ה אם שכח אחד מבני החיצונה ג״כ בעינן שיבטל לשתי החצרות » (ביאור הלכה שפ״א), when the eruv is placed in the outer one; if it is placed in the inner one, it writes that the residents of the inner one may withdraw from the outer one (referring to siman 378). This seif does not deal with this case; the Mechaber writes it in siman 378: « ואם נתנו עירובן בפנימי׳ ושכח א׳ מן הפנימי׳ ולא עירב שתיהן אסורות אבל אם שכח א׳ מן החיצונה ולא עירב פנימית מותרת » (שו״ע או״ח שע״ח:ג) — the eruv being placed in the inner one, if one of the outer one forgot, the inner one is permitted; placed in the outer one, both are forbidden until he renounces (same seif). The Tur writes it for an eruv placed in the inner one, « אבל נתנו עירובן בפנימית ושכח אחד מן החיצונה אף ביטול אין צריכין » (טור או״ח שפ״א), like the Gemara (Rava, within the discussion of Shmuel's statement; Level 2, section 5) and the Beis Yosef; and the Beis Yosef requires, for an eruv placed in the outer one, that he renounce to both courtyards (Level 2, section 5). The Shulchan Aruch HaRav writes that he need not renounce to the inner one, for the reason he gives in siman 378 when the eruv is placed in the inner one (Level 4, point ד); for an eruv placed in the outer one, consult your Rav.
- Seif ד, the reason for the prohibition to carry from the other's house to one's own — after following the Magen Avraham in the Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק כ״א), the Biur Halachah reads in the words of Tosafos, the Rosh and the Or Zarua, whom it names: « ויותר נראה בדבריהם דאפילו היה המבטל יחיד וביטל לרבים ג״כ אסור לו להוציא מרשותם לרשותו » (ביאור הלכה שפ״א), when he brings back into his house the very objects he had carried into the other's house after his renunciation.
- Seif ד, the gloss of the Rema — « וי״א דאין לבטל מבית לבית אלא אם כן ישאיר לעצמו חדר אחד שלא ביטל ואז מותר להכניס אפילו מבית חבירו לביתו וטוב להחמיר לכתחילה » (רמ״א או״ח שפ״א:ד). The Taz names those whom the Rema quotes: « וי״א שמביא רמ״א הוא ר״י ור״ת שחלקו עליו דאין מועיל ביטול מבית לבית דא״כ יהי׳ מותר לטלטל לכולן ויבטל תור׳ עירוב כיון שיש תקנ׳ ע״י ביטול אא״כ ישאיר לעצמו חדר א׳ » (ט״ז או״ח שפ״א ס״ק ג) — with him: in context, with Rashi, of whom he has just related, in the name of Tosafos and the Rosh, « דמעשה בא לפני רש״י בחופה א׳ ששכחו ולא עירבו והוצרכו להוציא מבית זה לבית זה והתיר להם ע״י שביטלו רשותם לא׳ » (ט״ז או״ח שפ״א ס״ק ג).
- Seif ד, then it is permitted to bring in — the Magen Avraham is puzzled: « ודבריהם תמוהים » (מגן אברהם שפ״א ס״ק ז), then writes, for an individual renouncing in favor of many who made an eruv, that it is permitted even without a room: « ואי מיירי ביחיד המבטל לרבים שעירבו א״כ אפי׳ לא שייר חדר נמי שרי דלא שייך לומר שתשתכח תורת עירוב » (מגן אברהם שפ״א ס״ק ז); the Mishnah Berurah quotes his question — an individual in relation to an individual not being a guest, bringing in from the other's house to one's own is like retaking possession of one's house — and the answer of the Chemed Moshe (ס״ק כ״ד). The Biur Halachah writes that according to the Even HaOzer and the Perishah, for whom an individual in relation to an individual is called a guest, « ולפ״ז אתי דברי רמ״א כפשוטו ולפלוגי אתי אדברי המחבר שאוסר להכניס » (ביאור הלכה שפ״א), and it ends: « וכן מצאתי להגר״א שכתב דדעה זו דאז מותר שמובא בהג״ה פליג אדעת המחבר » (ביאור הלכה שפ״א).
- Seif ז — without the renunciation back, those who had renounced do not carry, even if they had also renounced their houses (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ח, in the name of the Magen Avraham and others). The Magen Avraham writes that this is not the view of the Beis Yosef (ס״ק ט), who infers (ומשמע) that, if the one who renounced expressly renounced the domain of his house too, both are permitted and need not renounce back (Level 2, section 10).
- Chabad → Level 4 — Daat HaRav studies this siman in the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, siman שפ״א, under its own numbering, in 7 seifim (on how Sefaria's text divides them, see Level 4). On the view the Rema quotes, it writes « וְהָעִקָּר כִּסְבָרָא הָרִאשׁוֹנָה » (שו״ע הרב שפ״א:ה), and then « וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן טוֹב לְהַחֲמִיר לְכַתְּחִלָּה לְהַשְׁאִיר חֶדֶר אֶחָד » (שו״ע הרב שפ״א:ה).
7. Modern practical cases
Each situation below ties a case to a named seif; when the situation is a present-day one, the line says so: the site's application, not the words of the source.
| Situation | Quick analysis |
|---|---|
| A neighbor who renounced his domain then takes an object from his house out to the shared courtyard | Seif א: unwittingly, he does not forbid; deliberately, he forbids, « שהרי חוזר מביטולו שביטל » (שו״ע או״ח שפ״א:א) — unless the others had already taken possession; if he afterwards renounces anew, it helps (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק ג). According to Rashi, only taking possession after nightfall counts, and the Biur Halachah writes that there is reason to be stringent according to this view (section 6). Consult your Rav. |
| Two dwellings connected by an inner door, with no eruv between them | The site's application, seif ד: if one sees them as two houses with an opening between them, one may renounce to the other; according to the Mechaber, the one who renounces carries from his home to the other's, but not from the other's home to his own, nor, if he has a room open to his house, from that room to his house. According to the view the Rema quotes, he keeps one room for himself, and then he may bring in even from the other's home; the Rema adds that it is good to be stringent a priori. For the Vilna Gaon, see section 6; for the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Level 4, point ה. Whether such dwellings are houses in the sense of the seif, and how to make the renunciation (siman 380), is for your Rav to say. |
| An heir comes on Shabbos to live in the house he inherits | Seif ו: if the deceased had not made the eruv and died on Shabbos, the heir who comes to live in the courtyard forbids, and he may renounce his domain; if he does not come to live there, he does not forbid (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ו). Consult your Rav. |
| The residents of a courtyard want to carry each in turn | Seif ז: some renounce to the others until these have carried what they want, then these renounce back. Without this return, those who had renounced do not carry, even if they had also renounced their houses, when they are many (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ח; the Magen Avraham, ס״ק ט, writes that this is not the view of the Beis Yosef). Consult your Rav. |
For precise practical cases: the seifim make the rule depend, among other things, on the intention of the one who carries and on the taking of possession by the others (seif א), on the place of the renunciation (seifim ב, ג and ד) and on whether one could make the eruv while it was still day (seif ה; for the heir of seif ו, Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ז); and the commentators add reservations (section 6). For halachah lema'aseh, consult your Rav.
8. Practical synthesis of the Siman
The teachings of Siman שפ״א:
- One who renounced and carries from his house to the courtyard: unwittingly, he does not forbid; deliberately, he forbids — unless the others had already taken possession (seif א). According to Rashi, taking possession works only after nightfall, and the Biur Halachah writes that there is reason to be stringent according to this view.
- From courtyard to courtyard: renunciation works — two courtyards with an opening between them, each having made its own eruv, without a joint eruv; two courtyards, one inside the other, only the outer one having made the eruv, the inner one passing through it only when it needs to go out; or a joint eruv placed in the outer one, one of the inner one having forgotten — he then renounces to each of the residents of both courtyards (seif ב).
- A ruin belonging to the two houses between which it lies, when they forgot to make the eruv: one renounces to the other (seif ג).
- From house to house, with an opening between them, without an eruv: according to the Mechaber, the one who renounces carries from his house to the other's, but not the reverse; and if he has a room open to his house and renounced his house, he does not carry from the room to his house; according to the view the Rema quotes, one renounces from house to house only by keeping a room, and one may then bring in even from the other's house; the Rema adds that it is good to be stringent a priori (seif ד; section 6).
- Two houses on the two sides of the public domain, surrounded by non-Jews with a partition on Shabbos, so that they forbid each other: they cannot renounce one to the other (seif ה).
- The heir: if the one he inherits from did not make the eruv and died on Shabbos, and the heir comes to live in the courtyard and forbids, he may renounce (seif ו).
- One renounces, and renounces back, so that each may carry in turn (seif ז).
- For halachah lema'aseh, consult your Rav.
9. Comprehension questions
Check your understanding:
- Why does one who renounced and deliberately carries from his house to the courtyard forbid, and what does the others' taking possession change (seif א; Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק ג and ה)?
- According to Rashi, when does taking possession work, and why (seif א; Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק ו)?
- In seif ב, why must each courtyard have made its own eruv for them to be able to renounce to each other (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק ח)?
- In seif ד, why, according to the Mechaber, may the one who renounces carry from his house to the other's, but not the reverse (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ and כ״א)?
- Why, according to the view the Rema quotes, must one keep a room (Mishnah Berurah, ס״ק כ״ג)?
- Why can one not renounce in seif ה (ס״ק כ״ה), while the heir of seif ו can (ס״ק כ״ז)?
- What would happen in seif ז if those who received the renunciation did not give it back (ס״ק כ״ח)?
To go further
If you want to deepen this siman:
📖Join the chavrusa
- 📚 Level 2 — Lamdan: for pilpul, the שיטות ראשונים, the חקירות יסודיות, and the nuances of the Acharonim
- ✨ Level 3 — Synthesis: for review and rapid memorization with mnemonics
- 📜 Level 4 — Daat HaRav: the Shitah of the Alter Rebbe (Shulchan Aruch HaRav siman שפ״א)