Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 370 - The Laws [Governing] Participation in an Eruv

SECTION 370 The Laws [Governing] Participation in an Eruv (1-10)

1 When a person lives in a gatehouse, [the gatehouse] is not considered as a home [with regards to eruvin. This applies] even though [the gatehouse] has four walls. [The rationale is that since] many people pass through [the gatehouse] on their way to their homes, it is not considered as a dwelling, but rather, as a courtyard. [Consequently, one who lives in a gatehouse] is not required to join in an eruv with [the residents of] the other homes [located in his courtyard].1 Similarly, [a person] who lives in an exedra or a porch [located] in a courtyard does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden [in the courtyard even though he does not join in the common eruv], because these [structures] are not considered dwellings. Similarly, on the holiday of Sukkos, a sukkah is not considered a dwelling that causes [carrying] to be forbidden [in the adjoining courtyard].2

By contrast, when a person lives in a storage shed for straw, a barn, a storage house, [or] a storage shed for wood, [his presence] causes [carrying] to be forbidden [in the adjoining courtyard] unless he joins in the eruv. [The rationale is that these structures] are fit to dwell in and are considered as dwellings, even if they are constructed from reeds or the like.3

2 When a homeowner owns many homes in his courtyard and rents or lends them out to other people (for a specific time and [the owner] cannot evict [the tenants from the homes] within that time against their will),4 [the presence of these individuals] causes [the owner] to be forbidden [to carry] in the courtyard5 just as if [the tenants] owned these homes, unless they [all] join in an eruv.6 Similarly, it is forbidden to carry from [the owner’s] house to [the tenants’] homes unless they [all] join in an eruv.

[There is, however, an exception:] If, in [each of the rental units, the owner] has left articles that are [muktzeh, i.e., that are]forbidden to be moved on Shabbos because of a prohibition7 – in which instance, they may not be moved even to be used for a permitted purpose (litzorech gufam) or [to use] their place – it is considered as if [the owner] is dwelling in [these homes.8 The rationale is that the owner] did not remove his presence from these homes entirely and instead, he still retains holdings in them. [Hence, the presence of] these residents does not cause [the owner] to be forbidden [to carry in the courtyard], because all [the tenants] are considered [the owner’s] guests.9 Therefore, [the residents] are also permitted to take [articles] from their homes to the courtyard even though they did not join in an eruv, just like guests who reside in [the owner’s] home are permitted to take [articles] from his home to the courtyard without joining in an eruv with him.

If, however, [the owner] only10 [left] articles [in the rental units] that are permitted to be carried, [even only] for a permitted purpose or to use their place,11 he is not considered to have retained holdings [in these homes], since he can remove those [articles] when he needs them (or their places).12

There are authorities who maintain that if [the owner’s] property is not [easily] movable because of its weight,13 even though [the property] is permitted to be carried, [the owner] is considered to have retained his holdings in these [homes]. ([A guest] should act stringently in this regard.)14

Retaining holdings [in this manner] is effective only in homes that belong to [the host] – whether they are owned by him, or rented or borrowed by him – and then rented or lent out by him to others. By contrast, retaining holdings in a house that one does not own, rent, or borrow is not at all effective, and [the presence of a host and his guests] causes [carrying] to be forbidden for him [and them] in this courtyard and from his house to their houses.

3 There are authorities who postulate that retaining holdings in a house is effective only when there are no other residents in the courtyard aside [from the host of the homes and those who rent or borrow them from him], for then they are not required to establish an eruv at all. Alternatively, [retaining holdings in a house is effective] even when there are other residents in the courtyard, but those residents bring their [bread for the] eruv and deposit it in the home of this homeowner who retains holdings [in the other homes he owns] or [they deposit the bread] in one of the homes in which [this homeowner] retains holdings. [The rationale is that,] in such situations, none of [the residents of] these homes are required to contribute bread to the eruv, because all of these houses are considered as one home,15 and [the residents of] the home where the eruv is deposited are not required to contribute bread [for the eruv].16

If, however, the eruv is placed in the home of one of the [other] residents, [the residents of] all the homes [in which the owner retains holdings] are required to contribute bread for the eruv. [The rationale is that] since an eruv is required [to enable the residents of] these homes [to carry] because the home in which the owner dwells [is located in a courtyard with other homes], they must also contribute [bread] because of their own homes even though the owner retains holdings in them. The laws that [govern the homeowner’s relationship] with [his tenants] are the same as those that govern sons who [live in separate dwellings from their father, but] receive their sustenance from him, which will be explained [below].17

4 [An eruv is required in the following situation:] A person rented a large home from a non-Jew18 in which he lives together with a friend, one [living] in one room and one [living] in the other [room]. The person who rented [the home] retains holdings in the room where his friend lives. If initially, when [the person] first rented the house from the non-Jew, [the two friends] agreed to live together and [the person] rented [the house] from the non-Jew with this intent, [the two] are deemed partners even if only one of them [formalized] the rental [of the home] from the non-Jew. [Accordingly,] the one who [formalized] the rental cannot evict the other [one] throughout the entire time the home is rented from the non-Jew. [The rationale is that] since [the home] was rented from the non-Jew with the intent that [the two friends] dwell together, [the one who formalized the agreement] became his friend’s agent to rent [the home on behalf of both of them] from the non-Jew. Accordingly, the fact that [the renter] retains holdings in his friend’s [room] is immaterial, since [the room] does not belong to him.19

[Different laws apply, however,] if initially, when [the person] rented [the home], he rented [the entire home entirely] for himself, and afterwards changed his mind and rented out [part of the home] to his friend. [In such an instance,] the fact that [the person who rented the home] retains holdings in his friend’s room is significant [and the two rooms are considered as a single household].

5 [The following laws apply when] five groups of people20 spent a Shabbos in a reception hall21 and divided it into five rooms via partitions, with each [of the rooms] opening to the courtyard.22 If the partitions reach the ceiling – or within three handbreadths of the ceiling23 – each [partitioned area] is deemed a separate room. [This applies] even if the partitions are temporary, e.g., they are made from curtains. [In such a situation,] each of the groups must contribute [bread for] an eruv.24

When does the above apply? When there are other residents in the courtyard and the eruv for the courtyard is placed in [the home of] one of these residents, or [in a home] in another courtyard [whose residents] established an eruv with [the residents of] this [courtyard. The rationale is that] since [the people staying in] the hall must make an eruv because of the [other] residents [of the courtyard and in this context,] each of the groups [in the hall is considered a separate entity, each group] must contribute [bread for] the eruv. If, however, the [other] residents [of the courtyard] placed their [bread for the] eruv in this reception hall, [the people staying in the hall] do not have to contribute to the eruv at all. [The rationale is that] they are all dwelling in this house and [the residents of] the home where the eruv is deposited are not required to contribute bread for the eruv. True, this hall is [now] divided into five rooms by the partitions, and the eruv is [being deposited] in [only] one of the rooms. That is, however, of no consequence, since these are merely temporary partitions.

Similarly, if there are no other residents in the courtyard, there is no need for an eruv at all,25 for [the people staying in the hall] do not cause each other to be forbidden [to carry], since they are dwelling in one house which is only divided with temporary partitions.

If [the reception hall] was divided by partitions that do not reach the ceiling, even if there are other residents in the courtyard and the eruv for the entire courtyard is placed in [the home of] one of those residents, all the groups need only contribute one [loaf] for the eruv. [Since the partitions between the groups do not reach the ceiling, it is] as if there are no partitions between them at all.

If some [of the groups] made partitions that reach the ceiling and others did not, those who made [the full partitions] are deemed as separate [from the others and considered as distinct groups], while those who did not make [full partitions] are considered as [sharing] a joint [dwelling].

All the above applies when [the groups] made temporary partitions [meant to last only] for a brief period. If, however, they spend the Shabbos in actual [pre-existing] rooms and lofts – [rooms and lofts that are] actually [distinct from each other] – and all these rooms open to the courtyard, each [group] causes the other to be forbidden [to carry] even if there are no other residents in the courtyard. Each individual group must give [bread] for the eruv, even if they place the eruv [in one of the rooms or lofts] in this reception hall.

All the above applies when all the rooms have [individual] entrances to the courtyard. [Different rules apply,] by contrast, if only the outer [room] opens to the courtyard and all [the people staying in the other rooms] pass through [the outer room to enter the courtyard. In such an instance,] even if they are actual rooms, only [those staying in] the two innermost rooms must establish an eruv, for only [those rooms] are [considered as] dwellings and cause [the people staying] in each of them to be forbidden [to carry] in the courtyard and to carry from one [room] to the other.26 All of the other rooms, by contrast, are considered as gatehouses to [these rooms], as will be explained.27

All the above [applies] when all [the people] have equal rights to the reception hall.28 [Different laws apply when,] by contrast, a homeowner has a teacher or a scribe [dwelling] in his home, or [when] students study in the presence of their teacher and live in his home. Even though each one has his individual room that opens to the courtyard and also to the public domain, and [each one] eats and sleeps in his room, there is no need to establish an eruv in the courtyard at all, because [the presence of these individuals] does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden at all, not in the courtyard nor from their rooms to the [main] house or from one room to another. [This ruling applies] even if [the owner] does not retain holdings29 in [these people’s rooms. The rationale is that the owner] does not [intend to] lend them [the use of] his property [in a manner that they will] cause him to be prohibited [to carry] or for them to cause [each other] to be forbidden to carry. [Moreover, the owner] has the right to send them away at any time.30

[This leniency does not apply] if, by contrast, the rooms were acquired or rented (or lent in an arrangement that does not allow [the owner] to send [the borrowers] away in the middle of the time for which he lent [the rooms] to them. [In this situation] it cannot be said that [the owner] did not [intend to] lend [these people the use of] his property in a manner [that they will cause him] to be forbidden [to carry], since [the owner] already lent it to them and he cannot send them away.) [Hence,] they cause [the owner] (against his will) to be forbidden [to carry in the courtyard] unless he retains holdings in their rooms.

[This stringency applies] even if [the renters] use the large house in which the owner dwells for cooking and baking.31 Nevertheless, it is of no consequence, since they eat in their own rooms,32 unless the students receive their sustenance from their teacher, as will be explained.33

6 Fundamentally, a person’s dwelling is [determined as] the place where he eats bread34 and not the place where he sleeps and spends the night.35 Therefore, if the residents of a courtyard all eat in one house on Shabbos, even if each [household] eats from its own food on a separate table and each [household] has a separate room where [its members] dwell throughout the day and the night, [the residents of the courtyard] need not establish an eruv36 because they [all] are considered as the members of one household,37 and they do not cause each other to be forbidden [to carry in the courtyard].38

Similarly, if [the residents of this courtyard] needed to establish an eruv with [the residents of] another courtyard, one eruv [suffices] for all [the residents. Furthermore, all the residents need to contribute] only a single loaf [of bread between them. That loaf] should be taken to the place where the eruv is being established. Whichever [household] desires should contribute the loaf. Even the members of the host’s39 household may contribute a loaf of their own. If the [bread for] the eruv was brought to [the host’s household], it is not necessary for [the members of the host’s household] to contribute any bread at all, just like [the residents of] the home where an eruv [for a courtyard is placed] need not contribute a loaf. [The rationale is that] all of these homes are considered as one home, since the heads of the households eat in one home without a partition separating between them.

Even if at times a curtain is drawn [to separate between the different households] for the sake of privacy, it is not considered a partition that divides [the room] between [the households], even if [the curtain] reaches the ceiling.40 [The rationale is that the curtain] is not always drawn the entire time [the people] are in that house; [rather, the curtain] is only drawn when they wish to engage in a private activity. Afterwards, [the curtain] is removed. By contrast, when groups spend Shabbos in a reception hall, the curtains they draw between them remain drawn throughout the entire duration of [the groups’] stay [in the hall].

When a person has two houses in two courtyards, eating in one [house], but spending the entire [rest of the] day and night in the other, he causes [carrying] to be forbidden in [the courtyard where the home] in which he eats [is located] if he eats there on Shabbos,41and he must establish an eruv with [the residents of the courtyard in which the house where he eats is located. His presence] does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden in the other [courtyard, where he spends the rest of the day and night. The person] does not have to [join in its] eruv, but is still permitted to use that courtyard on Shabbos, because he is considered as the guest of its [residents].

7 [The following laws apply to] brothers who have homes in the courtyard belonging to their father, and they eat in their homes, while they receive their sustenance – whether food42 or money to purchase food – from their father:43 If there are other residents in the courtyard and they deposit [the bread for] the eruv for the entire courtyard in [the home of] one of these residents, the brothers and their father must each contribute [bread for] the eruv. [The rationale is that] since the households of the father and the sons are obligated [to join] in the eruv, each one must contribute individually.44

If, however, no one else resides with them in the courtyard, there is no need for an eruv at all, for [the presence of the father, his sons, and their households] do not cause each other to be forbidden [to carry]. Since they all partake of sustenance from the father, they are all considered as members of his household.45 [Moreover,] even if others reside [in the courtyard] with [the father and his sons], but [the others] deposit [the bread for] the eruv in the home of one of the brothers or the father, [the brothers and the father] are not required to [contribute to] the eruv at all. [The rationale is that] they are all considered as [staying in the] one house where [the bread for] the eruv is being deposited, [and the residents of the house where the bread for] the eruv is being deposited need not contribute bread.46

The same laws apply to wives who receive sustenance from their husbands, servants who receive sustenance from their masters, and students who receive sustenance from their teachers.47

8 [The following laws apply when] there are ten dwellings [in the same structure], one leading to the other and only the outermost one opens to the courtyard: [In such an instance, the residents of] all these [inner dwellings] pass through each other’s [dwelling] and go out to the courtyard through the outermost one. Only [the residents of] the two innermost [dwellings] need to establish an eruv, for only these [two residences] are halachically categorized as dwellings and cause [carrying] to be prohibited in the courtyard,48 from dwelling to dwelling, and from these [dwellings] to the dwellings outside them and to the courtyard.

However, the dwellings located outside [these two innermost units] are [not halachically considered dwellings, but are] categorized as a courtyard, since each one of them serves as a gatehouse to the dwelling beyond it.49 Thus the third [to the last inner] dwelling is a gatehouse to the innermost two [homes], and it is [still] referred to as a gatehouse [used by] many people; it is not categorized as a dwelling, since many people50 pass through it.

The second to last dwelling, by contrast, is a gatehouse only for the one dwelling that is located beyond it, and [serving as] a gatehouse to [only] one house does not cause [a structure] to be removed from the category of a home.

9 When a person is a guest51 in a courtyard, even if he has a dwelling of his own and eats and sleeps in his own dwelling, as long as he does not stay there [semi-]permanently, but only for 30 days or less,52 [even if he does not contribute to the eruv,] his [presence] does not cause the residents of the courtyard to be forbidden [to carry. Instead,] both he and they are permitted to carry in the courtyard, both from his home as well as from the others’ homes [to the courtyard]. Even if there are many guests and there is only one host, they all are considered as secondary to him and are like the members of his household. [This ruling applies] even if the dwellings in which the guests stay do not belong to the host but to non-Jews53 or to other Jews who do not live there.

There are authorities who maintain that a guest who stays in a separate dwelling or room is not considered as secondary to the host and as a member of his household. Instead, anyone who does not stay as a guest in a [semi-]permanent manner does not have a portion in the courtyard and [therefore] does not cause the homeowner to be forbidden to carry from his house to his courtyard. It is, nevertheless, forbidden to carry from the guest’s dwelling to the courtyard. [This applies both] to [the guest] and to the homeowner. Since [the homeowner] rented him this dwelling for a given period, it is [the renter’s, for even] a rental for a day is [equivalent] to a sale, and the home is [the renter’s for the rental period].54 Thus, when [the renter] takes [an object] from [his dwelling] to the courtyard belonging to the owner, it is as if he is taking it from one domain to another.

(The same law applies if [the owner] lent [the dwelling to a guest] in a manner that [the owner] may not send [the guest] away during the time he lent [the dwelling] to [the guest].

This [situation] does not [resemble an instance where] one of the residents of a courtyard forgot and did not join in the eruv. [In that instance,] when [the resident of the courtyard who forgot to join in the eruv] nullifies [his ownership over] his domain to the others, he is also permitted to take [objects] out from his house to the courtyard, because he is [then] considered as a guest of the others, as stated in sec. 380[:2-3.55 The resident who forgot to join in the eruv is granted that license] because when he nullified [his ownership], he withdrew himself from [the possession] of his house and gave it to the other [residents of the courtyard].

A guest, by contrast, does not nullify [his ownership] or withdraw [his possession]. Nor may the other residents of the courtyard expel him [from the residence he is using]. Thus, the domain of [the guest’s] house is designated as his and the domain of the courtyard is designated as theirs. It is forbidden to take [an object] from one of these domains to the other until an eruv is established.)

10 After 30 days, however, [the guest’s presence] causes the residents of the courtyard to be forbidden [to carry] if they may not send [the guest] away over the course of the time he rented or borrowed [the dwelling].

Nevertheless, even if [the guest] arranged [to rent or borrow the dwelling] for more than 30 days, [his presence] does not cause [carrying] to be forbidden until after 30 days, not within [these first] 30 days. [This leniency applies] even if [the person] is accustomed to visiting this place and always stays for more than 30 [days].

To whom does the above apply? To a Jewish guest. By contrast, [the presence of] a non-Jewish boarder who frequently comes and stays [more than 30 days] causes [carrying] to be forbidden immediately,56 as will be explained in sec. 384[:1]. There are authorities who maintain that even a Jew who frequently comes and stays [more than 30 days] causes [carrying] to be forbidden immediately. With regard to the halachah, [since the matter concerns a point of] Rabbinic Law, the more lenient opinion may be followed.

All the above applies when there is [at least] one homeowner who lives permanently in the courtyard, for then, the guests in the other dwellings in the courtyard are secondary to him. When, however, only guests [stay] in the courtyard, they cause each other to be forbidden [to carry] immediately57 if each one has a private room in which to eat.58 If there is a non-Jew living in the courtyard, it is necessary to rent his domain from him, as will be explained in sec. 382[:1].

All the above applies in a place where an eruv chatzeiros is not made for the people at large. When, by contrast, the community establishes an eruv chatzeiros for the entire year, the visiting guests do not cause [the permanent inhabitants] or each other to be forbidden [to carry]. The rationale is that the [Rabbinic] court [already] had [them] in mind, stipulating that they be granted a share in the eruv, as explained in sec. 366[:12].