Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

March 22, 2017 | 讻状讚 讘讗讚专 转砖注状讝

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Bava Batra 59

What types of things that either jut out into your neighbor’s property or affect your neighbor (like a window) can you create a chazaka聽on if they haven’t complained? 聽It depends on whether or not it’s something we would expect the neighbor to complain about. 聽If it is unlikely they will complain, then their lack of complaint doesn’t enable you to create a chazaka. 聽In each case, what does it mean to create a chazaka? 聽What types of things do they not even have the right to complain about?

转谞谉 讛诪讝讞讬诇讛 讬砖 诇讛 讞讝拽讛 讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讛谞讱 转专转讬 砖驻讬专

We learned in the mishna: With regard to a gutter pipe, one does have the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use. Granted, according to the one who says those first two explanations, i.e., Shmuel and Rabbi 岣nina, it is well. The distinction between the halakha with regard to a spout and that of a gutter pipe is clear: Since the gutter pipe is fixed in place, there is an acquired privilege, and it may not be moved or shortened.

讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 砖讗诐 专爪讛 诇讘谞讜转 转讞转讬讜 讘讜谞讛 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪讬谞讛

But according to Rav Yirmeya bar Abba, the one who says that the mishna means: If the owner of the field wishes to build beneath it he may build, what difference does it make to the owner of the gutter pipe if the owner of the field builds beneath it? Why would he have the right to prevent it?

讛讻讗 讘诪讝讞讬诇讛 砖诇 讘谞讬谉 注住拽讬谞谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讬 讚转转专注 讗砖讬转讗讬

The Gemara answers: Here we are dealing with a gutter pipe that is made of stone and is built into the walls of the building, in a case where the owner of the gutter pipe said to the owner of the field: It is not amenable to me that you build beneath my gutter pipe, as my walls will weaken as a result.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 爪讬谞讜专 讛诪拽诇讞 诪讬诐 诇讞爪专 讞讘专讜 讜讘讗 讘注诇 讛讙讙 诇住讜转诪讜 讘注诇 讛讞爪专 诪注讻讘 注诇讬讜 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚讗转 拽谞讬转 诇讱 讞爪专 讚讬讚讬 诇诪砖讚讗 讘讬讛 诪讬讗 诇讚讬讚讬 谞诪讬 拽谞讬 诇讬 诪讬讗 讚讗讬讙专讱

Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: With regard to a pipe from which water is draining into another鈥檚 courtyard and the owner of the roof comes to seal his drainage pipe, the owner of the courtyard can prevent him from doing so. As the owner of the field can say to him: Just as you have acquired my courtyard for the purpose of throwing your water into it, I have also acquired the water of your roof, and since I wish to use it, you may not seal the pipe.

讗讬转诪专 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗 讗诪专 诪注讻讘 专讘讬 讞诪讗 讗诪专 讗讬谞讜 诪注讻讘 讗讝诇 砖讬讬诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讘讬住讗 讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪注讻讘 拽专讬 注诇讬讛 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 讜讛讞讜讟 讛诪砖诇砖 诇讗 讘诪讛专讛 讬谞转拽 讝讛 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗 讘谞讜 砖诇 专讘讬 讞诪讗 讘谞讜 砖诇 专讘讬 讘讬住讗

It was stated that there is a dispute with regard to this issue, as Rabbi Oshaya says: The owner of the courtyard can prevent the owner of the roof from sealing the pipe, while Rabbi 岣ma, Rabbi Oshaya鈥檚 father, says: He cannot prevent it. Rabbi Oshaya went and asked Rabbi 岣ma鈥檚 father, Rabbi Bisa. Rabbi Bisa said to them: He can prevent it. Rami bar 岣ma read the verse about him: 鈥淎nd if a man prevail against him that is alone, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken鈥 (Ecclesiastes 4:12), saying that this applies to Rabbi Oshaya, son of Rabbi 岣ma, son of Rabbi Bisa, three generations of Torah scholars in one family who knew one another and conversed with each other with regard to matters of halakha.

住讜诇诐 讛诪爪专讬 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 住讜诇诐 讛诪爪专讬 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讻诇 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 讗专讘注讛 讞讜讜拽讬谉

搂 The mishna teaches that with regard to an Egyptian ladder, which is small and portable, one has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use. The Gemara asks: What is an Egyptian ladder like? The members of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: It is any ladder that does not have four rungs.

讞诇讜谉 讛诪爪专讬转 讗讬谉 诇讛 讞讝拽讛 讻讜壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讙讘讬 住讜诇诐 讚诇讗 诪驻专砖 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讙讘讬 讞诇讜谉 讚诪驻专砖 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 讘注讬 讗讬驻诇讜讙讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘住讬驻讗

The mishna teaches that with regard to an Egyptian window, one has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use. The Gemara asks: What is different with regard to an Egyptian ladder, that the mishna does not explain what it is, and what is different with regard to an Egyptian window, that the mishna does explain what it is? The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the mishna to state the definition of an Egyptian window according to the unattributed opinion of the mishna because it wants to cite the dissenting opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in the latter clause.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诇诪讟讛 诪讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讬砖 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 诇诪注诇讛 诪讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 讜专讘讬 讗讬诇注讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪注诇讛 诪讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转

With regard to windows, Rabbi Zeira says: If one built a large window at a height that is lower than four cubits from the ground, he has the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and therefore, his neighbor can protest the initial construction of the window. If one built a large window at a height that is above four cubits from the ground, he has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and therefore his neighbor cannot protest its construction. And Rabbi Ile鈥檃 says: Even if it is built at a height that is above four cubits from the ground, he has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, but nevertheless, his neighbor can protest its construction.

诇讬诪讗 讘讻讜驻讬谉 注诇 诪讚转 住讚讜诐 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 讚诪专 住讘专 讻讜驻讬谉 讜诪专 住讘专 讗讬谉 讻讜驻讬谉

The Gemara asks: Shall we say that they disagree with regard to whether there is coercion concerning conduct characteristic of Sodom? Perhaps their dispute is with regard to a circumstance where one will not suffer any loss while another gains some benefit, and the former desires to prevent the latter from gaining the benefit, if the former is coerced into not being evil without reason and consequently allows the latter to derive the benefit, counter to the behavior of the residents of Sodom. One Sage, Rabbi Zeira, holds that there is coercion, and therefore the neighbor who does not suffer any damage from a high window cannot protest, and one Sage, Rabbi Ile鈥檃, holds that there is no coercion.

诇讗 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讻讜驻讬谉 讜砖讗谞讬 讛讻讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚诪讜转讘转 砖专砖讬驻讗 转讜转讱 讜拽讬讬诪转 讜拽讗 讞讝讬转 讛讛讜讗 讚讗转讗 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 砖讚专讬讛 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 诪诪诇 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 讻专讘讬 讗讬诇注讗

The Gemara rejects this: No, everyone agrees that there is coercion concerning conduct characteristic of Sodom, and it is different here, as according to the opinion of Rabbi Ile鈥檃 this is not conduct characteristic of Sodom, as the neighbor can say to the one who constructed the window: There are times when you place a bench beneath yourself, and you stand and see into my home. Therefore, I can protest. The Gemara relates that there was a certain individual who came before Rabbi Ami and presented this precise scenario. Rabbi Ami sent him before Rabbi Abba bar Memel to ask for a ruling. Rabbi Abba bar Memel said to him: Act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ile鈥檃.

讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讜诇讗讜专讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讬砖 诇讜 讞讝拽讛

Since the mishna cited a dispute with regard to the conditions under which an owner has acquired the privilege to use a window, the Gemara teaches that Shmuel says: And if a window was built for the purpose of enabling light to enter a dark room, then the owner of the window has the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, whatever size it is, not only if it is a large window. And if the neighbor did not protest its construction, he cannot subsequently force the owner of the window to seal it.

诪转谞讬壮 讛讝讬讝 注讚 讟驻讞 讬砖 诇讜 讞讝拽讛

MISHNA: With regard to a projection emerging from the wall of one鈥檚 house, overhanging a courtyard, one has the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use if it protrudes at least as far as a handbreadth,

讜讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 驻讞讜转 诪讟驻讞 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讗讬谉 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转

and the owner of the courtyard can protest its construction. If it protrudes less than a handbreadth, the owner of the house has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and the owner of the courtyard cannot protest its construction.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗住讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 诪谞讬 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘讬 诪谞讬 讛讞讝讬拽 讘讟驻讞 讛讞讝讬拽 讘讗专讘注 诪讗讬 拽讗诪专 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讛讞讝讬拽 专讜讞讘 讟驻讞 讘诪砖讱 讗专讘注 讛讞讝讬拽 讘专讜讞讘 讗专讘注

GEMARA: Rabbi Asi says that Rabbi Mani says, and some say that Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov says that Rabbi Mani says: If one established an acquired privilege with regard to a projection of a handbreadth, he has established an acquired privilege with regard to four handbreadths. The Gemara asks: What is he saying? Abaye said that this is what he is saying: If one established an acquired privilege with regard to a projection that measures one handbreadth wide by four handbreadths long, he has established an acquired privilege with regard to extending the projection to a width of four handbreadths.

驻讞讜转 诪讟驻讞 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讘注诇 讛讙讙 讘讘注诇 讛讞爪专 讗讘诇 讘注诇 讛讞爪专 讘讘注诇 讛讙讙 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 讜专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘注诇 讞爪专 讘讘注诇 讛讙讙 讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转

The mishna teaches that if the projection protrudes less than a handbreadth the owner of the house has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and the owner of the courtyard cannot protest. Rav Huna says: They taught only that the owner of the roof cannot protest the actions of the owner of the courtyard, i.e., he may not demand that the owner of the courtyard refrain from construction that interferes with the former鈥檚 use of the projection. But the owner of the courtyard can protest the actions of the owner of the roof, and demand that the latter not build a projection of any size, even less than a handbreadth. He can also demand that the owner of the roof not use an existing projection, since it leads to damage caused by sight. And Rav Yehuda says: Even the owner of the courtyard cannot protest the actions of the owner of the roof.

诇讬诪讗 讘讛讬讝拽 专讗讬讛 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 讚诪专 住讘专 砖诪讬讛 讛讬讝拽 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗讜 砖诪讬讛 讛讬讝拽

The Gemara suggests: Shall we say that they disagree with regard to damage caused by sight? As one Sage, Rav Huna, holds that it is considered to be damage, and therefore the owner of the courtyard can protest, since the owner of the roof has the means to see into the other鈥檚 courtyard when using this projection, and one Sage, Rav Yehuda, holds that it is not considered to be damage.

诇讗 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 砖诪讬讛 讛讬讝拽 讜砖讗谞讬 讛讻讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇转砖诪讬砖转讗 诇讗 讞讝讬 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诇诪转诇讗 讘讬讛 诪讬讚讬 诪讛讚专谞讗 讗驻讗讬 讜转诇讬谞讗 讘讬讛

The Gemara rejects this: No, everyone agrees that damage caused by sight is considered to be damage. And Rav Yehuda holds it is different here, as the owner of the roof can say to the owner of the courtyard: The projection is not suitable for use, since it is too small for me to stand upon and look into the courtyard. For what purpose is it suitable? To hang items on it, and nothing more. I will turn my face away and hang items on it without looking into your courtyard.

讜讗讬讚讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚讘注讬转转

And the other amora, Rav Huna, holds that the owner of the courtyard can say to the owner of the roof: There may be times when you are frightened due to the height of the projection, and you will look into my courtyard while using it.

诪转谞讬壮 诇讗 讬驻转讞 讗讚诐 讞诇讜谞讜转讬讜 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 诇拽讞 讘讬转 讘讞爪专 讗讞专转 诇讗 讬驻转讞谞讛 讘讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讘谞讛 注诇讬讬讛 注诇 讙讘讬 讘讬转讜 诇讗 讬驻转讞谞讛 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讗诇讗 讗诐 专爪讛 讘讜谞讛 讗转 讛讞讚专 诇驻谞讬诐 诪讘讬转讜 讜讘讜谞讛 注诇讬讬讛 注诇 讙讘讬 讘讬转讜 讜驻讜转讞讛 诇转讜讱 讘讬转讜

MISHNA: A person may not open his windows, i.e., build an opening in a wall to use as a window, into a courtyard belonging to partners, i.e., a courtyard in which he is a partner. If he purchased a house in another, adjacent courtyard, he may not open the house into a courtyard belonging to partners. If he built a loft on top of his house, he may not open it into a courtyard belonging to partners. Rather, if he desired to build a loft, he may build a room within his house, or he may build a loft on top of his house, and open it into his house, not directly into the courtyard.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讞爪专 讞讘讬专讜 谞诪讬 诇讗

GEMARA: With regard to the mishna鈥檚 ruling that one may not open a window into a courtyard that he co-owns, the Gemara asks: Why did the mishna specifically render it prohibited for one to open a window into a courtyard belonging to partners? One may not open a window into another鈥檚 courtyard either, as it will lead to damage caused by sight.

诇讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 拽讗诪专 诇讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 诇讞爪专 讞讘专讜 讚诇讗 讗讘诇 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 住讜祝 住讜祝 讛讗 拽讗 讘注讬转 讗爪讟谞讜注讬 诪讬谞讗讬 讘讞爪专 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 注讚 讛讗讬讚谞讗 讘讞爪专 讛讜讛 讘注讬谞讗 讗爪讟谞讜注讬 诪讬谞讱 讛砖转讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讘讬转 谞诪讬 讘注讬谞讗 讗爪讟谞讜注讬 诪讬谞讱

The Gemara replies that the mishna is speaking utilizing the style of: It is not necessary, as follows: It is not necessary to say that it is not permitted for one to open a window into another鈥檚 courtyard, where he is certainly not allowed to look; but where one wants to open a window into a courtyard belonging to partners, where the owner of the window can say to the other partner: Ultimately, since you need to conceal yourself from me and conduct yourself modestly in the courtyard where I too am a partner and have the right to be present, why does it bother you if I open a window into there? Therefore, the mishna teaches us that the partner may say to him: Until now I needed to conceal myself from you only when we were both in the courtyard. Now I will need to conceal myself from you even in the house, as you can see into my house from your window.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪注砖讛 讘讗讚诐 讗讞讚 砖驻转讞 讞诇讜谞讬讜 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讜讘讗 诇驻谞讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗诪专 诇讜 讛讞讝拽转 讘谞讬 讛讞讝拽转 讜讘讗 诇驻谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讗诪专 讬讙注转 讜驻转讞转 讬讙注 讜住转讜诐

The Sages taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving a person who opened his windows into a courtyard belonging to partners and came before Rabbi Yishmael bar Rabbi Yosei, who said to him: You have established an acquired privilege, my son; you have established an acquired privilege, and you may not be prevented from using the windows. And he came before Rabbi 岣yya, who said to him: You toiled and opened the windows; you must toil and seal them, as the partners have the right to prevent you from using these windows.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉

Rav Na岣an said:

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Bava Batra 59

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Bava Batra 59

转谞谉 讛诪讝讞讬诇讛 讬砖 诇讛 讞讝拽讛 讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讛谞讱 转专转讬 砖驻讬专

We learned in the mishna: With regard to a gutter pipe, one does have the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use. Granted, according to the one who says those first two explanations, i.e., Shmuel and Rabbi 岣nina, it is well. The distinction between the halakha with regard to a spout and that of a gutter pipe is clear: Since the gutter pipe is fixed in place, there is an acquired privilege, and it may not be moved or shortened.

讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 砖讗诐 专爪讛 诇讘谞讜转 转讞转讬讜 讘讜谞讛 诪讗讬 谞驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪讬谞讛

But according to Rav Yirmeya bar Abba, the one who says that the mishna means: If the owner of the field wishes to build beneath it he may build, what difference does it make to the owner of the gutter pipe if the owner of the field builds beneath it? Why would he have the right to prevent it?

讛讻讗 讘诪讝讞讬诇讛 砖诇 讘谞讬谉 注住拽讬谞谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讬 讚转转专注 讗砖讬转讗讬

The Gemara answers: Here we are dealing with a gutter pipe that is made of stone and is built into the walls of the building, in a case where the owner of the gutter pipe said to the owner of the field: It is not amenable to me that you build beneath my gutter pipe, as my walls will weaken as a result.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 爪讬谞讜专 讛诪拽诇讞 诪讬诐 诇讞爪专 讞讘专讜 讜讘讗 讘注诇 讛讙讙 诇住讜转诪讜 讘注诇 讛讞爪专 诪注讻讘 注诇讬讜 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚讗转 拽谞讬转 诇讱 讞爪专 讚讬讚讬 诇诪砖讚讗 讘讬讛 诪讬讗 诇讚讬讚讬 谞诪讬 拽谞讬 诇讬 诪讬讗 讚讗讬讙专讱

Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: With regard to a pipe from which water is draining into another鈥檚 courtyard and the owner of the roof comes to seal his drainage pipe, the owner of the courtyard can prevent him from doing so. As the owner of the field can say to him: Just as you have acquired my courtyard for the purpose of throwing your water into it, I have also acquired the water of your roof, and since I wish to use it, you may not seal the pipe.

讗讬转诪专 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗 讗诪专 诪注讻讘 专讘讬 讞诪讗 讗诪专 讗讬谞讜 诪注讻讘 讗讝诇 砖讬讬诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讘讬住讗 讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪注讻讘 拽专讬 注诇讬讛 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 讜讛讞讜讟 讛诪砖诇砖 诇讗 讘诪讛专讛 讬谞转拽 讝讛 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗 讘谞讜 砖诇 专讘讬 讞诪讗 讘谞讜 砖诇 专讘讬 讘讬住讗

It was stated that there is a dispute with regard to this issue, as Rabbi Oshaya says: The owner of the courtyard can prevent the owner of the roof from sealing the pipe, while Rabbi 岣ma, Rabbi Oshaya鈥檚 father, says: He cannot prevent it. Rabbi Oshaya went and asked Rabbi 岣ma鈥檚 father, Rabbi Bisa. Rabbi Bisa said to them: He can prevent it. Rami bar 岣ma read the verse about him: 鈥淎nd if a man prevail against him that is alone, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken鈥 (Ecclesiastes 4:12), saying that this applies to Rabbi Oshaya, son of Rabbi 岣ma, son of Rabbi Bisa, three generations of Torah scholars in one family who knew one another and conversed with each other with regard to matters of halakha.

住讜诇诐 讛诪爪专讬 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 住讜诇诐 讛诪爪专讬 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讻诇 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 讗专讘注讛 讞讜讜拽讬谉

搂 The mishna teaches that with regard to an Egyptian ladder, which is small and portable, one has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use. The Gemara asks: What is an Egyptian ladder like? The members of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: It is any ladder that does not have four rungs.

讞诇讜谉 讛诪爪专讬转 讗讬谉 诇讛 讞讝拽讛 讻讜壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讙讘讬 住讜诇诐 讚诇讗 诪驻专砖 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讙讘讬 讞诇讜谉 讚诪驻专砖 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 讘注讬 讗讬驻诇讜讙讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘住讬驻讗

The mishna teaches that with regard to an Egyptian window, one has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use. The Gemara asks: What is different with regard to an Egyptian ladder, that the mishna does not explain what it is, and what is different with regard to an Egyptian window, that the mishna does explain what it is? The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the mishna to state the definition of an Egyptian window according to the unattributed opinion of the mishna because it wants to cite the dissenting opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in the latter clause.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诇诪讟讛 诪讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讬砖 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 诇诪注诇讛 诪讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 讜专讘讬 讗讬诇注讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪注诇讛 诪讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转

With regard to windows, Rabbi Zeira says: If one built a large window at a height that is lower than four cubits from the ground, he has the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and therefore, his neighbor can protest the initial construction of the window. If one built a large window at a height that is above four cubits from the ground, he has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and therefore his neighbor cannot protest its construction. And Rabbi Ile鈥檃 says: Even if it is built at a height that is above four cubits from the ground, he has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, but nevertheless, his neighbor can protest its construction.

诇讬诪讗 讘讻讜驻讬谉 注诇 诪讚转 住讚讜诐 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 讚诪专 住讘专 讻讜驻讬谉 讜诪专 住讘专 讗讬谉 讻讜驻讬谉

The Gemara asks: Shall we say that they disagree with regard to whether there is coercion concerning conduct characteristic of Sodom? Perhaps their dispute is with regard to a circumstance where one will not suffer any loss while another gains some benefit, and the former desires to prevent the latter from gaining the benefit, if the former is coerced into not being evil without reason and consequently allows the latter to derive the benefit, counter to the behavior of the residents of Sodom. One Sage, Rabbi Zeira, holds that there is coercion, and therefore the neighbor who does not suffer any damage from a high window cannot protest, and one Sage, Rabbi Ile鈥檃, holds that there is no coercion.

诇讗 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讻讜驻讬谉 讜砖讗谞讬 讛讻讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚诪讜转讘转 砖专砖讬驻讗 转讜转讱 讜拽讬讬诪转 讜拽讗 讞讝讬转 讛讛讜讗 讚讗转讗 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 砖讚专讬讛 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 诪诪诇 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 讻专讘讬 讗讬诇注讗

The Gemara rejects this: No, everyone agrees that there is coercion concerning conduct characteristic of Sodom, and it is different here, as according to the opinion of Rabbi Ile鈥檃 this is not conduct characteristic of Sodom, as the neighbor can say to the one who constructed the window: There are times when you place a bench beneath yourself, and you stand and see into my home. Therefore, I can protest. The Gemara relates that there was a certain individual who came before Rabbi Ami and presented this precise scenario. Rabbi Ami sent him before Rabbi Abba bar Memel to ask for a ruling. Rabbi Abba bar Memel said to him: Act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ile鈥檃.

讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讜诇讗讜专讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讬砖 诇讜 讞讝拽讛

Since the mishna cited a dispute with regard to the conditions under which an owner has acquired the privilege to use a window, the Gemara teaches that Shmuel says: And if a window was built for the purpose of enabling light to enter a dark room, then the owner of the window has the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, whatever size it is, not only if it is a large window. And if the neighbor did not protest its construction, he cannot subsequently force the owner of the window to seal it.

诪转谞讬壮 讛讝讬讝 注讚 讟驻讞 讬砖 诇讜 讞讝拽讛

MISHNA: With regard to a projection emerging from the wall of one鈥檚 house, overhanging a courtyard, one has the means to establish an acquired privilege for its use if it protrudes at least as far as a handbreadth,

讜讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 驻讞讜转 诪讟驻讞 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讗讬谉 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转

and the owner of the courtyard can protest its construction. If it protrudes less than a handbreadth, the owner of the house has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and the owner of the courtyard cannot protest its construction.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗住讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 诪谞讬 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘讬 诪谞讬 讛讞讝讬拽 讘讟驻讞 讛讞讝讬拽 讘讗专讘注 诪讗讬 拽讗诪专 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讛讞讝讬拽 专讜讞讘 讟驻讞 讘诪砖讱 讗专讘注 讛讞讝讬拽 讘专讜讞讘 讗专讘注

GEMARA: Rabbi Asi says that Rabbi Mani says, and some say that Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov says that Rabbi Mani says: If one established an acquired privilege with regard to a projection of a handbreadth, he has established an acquired privilege with regard to four handbreadths. The Gemara asks: What is he saying? Abaye said that this is what he is saying: If one established an acquired privilege with regard to a projection that measures one handbreadth wide by four handbreadths long, he has established an acquired privilege with regard to extending the projection to a width of four handbreadths.

驻讞讜转 诪讟驻讞 讗讬谉 诇讜 讞讝拽讛 讜讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讘注诇 讛讙讙 讘讘注诇 讛讞爪专 讗讘诇 讘注诇 讛讞爪专 讘讘注诇 讛讙讙 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转 讜专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘注诇 讞爪专 讘讘注诇 讛讙讙 讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇诪讞讜转

The mishna teaches that if the projection protrudes less than a handbreadth the owner of the house has no means to establish an acquired privilege for its use, and the owner of the courtyard cannot protest. Rav Huna says: They taught only that the owner of the roof cannot protest the actions of the owner of the courtyard, i.e., he may not demand that the owner of the courtyard refrain from construction that interferes with the former鈥檚 use of the projection. But the owner of the courtyard can protest the actions of the owner of the roof, and demand that the latter not build a projection of any size, even less than a handbreadth. He can also demand that the owner of the roof not use an existing projection, since it leads to damage caused by sight. And Rav Yehuda says: Even the owner of the courtyard cannot protest the actions of the owner of the roof.

诇讬诪讗 讘讛讬讝拽 专讗讬讛 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 讚诪专 住讘专 砖诪讬讛 讛讬讝拽 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗讜 砖诪讬讛 讛讬讝拽

The Gemara suggests: Shall we say that they disagree with regard to damage caused by sight? As one Sage, Rav Huna, holds that it is considered to be damage, and therefore the owner of the courtyard can protest, since the owner of the roof has the means to see into the other鈥檚 courtyard when using this projection, and one Sage, Rav Yehuda, holds that it is not considered to be damage.

诇讗 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 砖诪讬讛 讛讬讝拽 讜砖讗谞讬 讛讻讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇转砖诪讬砖转讗 诇讗 讞讝讬 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诇诪转诇讗 讘讬讛 诪讬讚讬 诪讛讚专谞讗 讗驻讗讬 讜转诇讬谞讗 讘讬讛

The Gemara rejects this: No, everyone agrees that damage caused by sight is considered to be damage. And Rav Yehuda holds it is different here, as the owner of the roof can say to the owner of the courtyard: The projection is not suitable for use, since it is too small for me to stand upon and look into the courtyard. For what purpose is it suitable? To hang items on it, and nothing more. I will turn my face away and hang items on it without looking into your courtyard.

讜讗讬讚讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚讘注讬转转

And the other amora, Rav Huna, holds that the owner of the courtyard can say to the owner of the roof: There may be times when you are frightened due to the height of the projection, and you will look into my courtyard while using it.

诪转谞讬壮 诇讗 讬驻转讞 讗讚诐 讞诇讜谞讜转讬讜 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 诇拽讞 讘讬转 讘讞爪专 讗讞专转 诇讗 讬驻转讞谞讛 讘讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讘谞讛 注诇讬讬讛 注诇 讙讘讬 讘讬转讜 诇讗 讬驻转讞谞讛 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讗诇讗 讗诐 专爪讛 讘讜谞讛 讗转 讛讞讚专 诇驻谞讬诐 诪讘讬转讜 讜讘讜谞讛 注诇讬讬讛 注诇 讙讘讬 讘讬转讜 讜驻讜转讞讛 诇转讜讱 讘讬转讜

MISHNA: A person may not open his windows, i.e., build an opening in a wall to use as a window, into a courtyard belonging to partners, i.e., a courtyard in which he is a partner. If he purchased a house in another, adjacent courtyard, he may not open the house into a courtyard belonging to partners. If he built a loft on top of his house, he may not open it into a courtyard belonging to partners. Rather, if he desired to build a loft, he may build a room within his house, or he may build a loft on top of his house, and open it into his house, not directly into the courtyard.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讞爪专 讞讘讬专讜 谞诪讬 诇讗

GEMARA: With regard to the mishna鈥檚 ruling that one may not open a window into a courtyard that he co-owns, the Gemara asks: Why did the mishna specifically render it prohibited for one to open a window into a courtyard belonging to partners? One may not open a window into another鈥檚 courtyard either, as it will lead to damage caused by sight.

诇讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 拽讗诪专 诇讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 诇讞爪专 讞讘专讜 讚诇讗 讗讘诇 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 住讜祝 住讜祝 讛讗 拽讗 讘注讬转 讗爪讟谞讜注讬 诪讬谞讗讬 讘讞爪专 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 注讚 讛讗讬讚谞讗 讘讞爪专 讛讜讛 讘注讬谞讗 讗爪讟谞讜注讬 诪讬谞讱 讛砖转讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讘讬转 谞诪讬 讘注讬谞讗 讗爪讟谞讜注讬 诪讬谞讱

The Gemara replies that the mishna is speaking utilizing the style of: It is not necessary, as follows: It is not necessary to say that it is not permitted for one to open a window into another鈥檚 courtyard, where he is certainly not allowed to look; but where one wants to open a window into a courtyard belonging to partners, where the owner of the window can say to the other partner: Ultimately, since you need to conceal yourself from me and conduct yourself modestly in the courtyard where I too am a partner and have the right to be present, why does it bother you if I open a window into there? Therefore, the mishna teaches us that the partner may say to him: Until now I needed to conceal myself from you only when we were both in the courtyard. Now I will need to conceal myself from you even in the house, as you can see into my house from your window.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪注砖讛 讘讗讚诐 讗讞讚 砖驻转讞 讞诇讜谞讬讜 诇讞爪专 讛砖讜转驻讬谉 讜讘讗 诇驻谞讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗诪专 诇讜 讛讞讝拽转 讘谞讬 讛讞讝拽转 讜讘讗 诇驻谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讗诪专 讬讙注转 讜驻转讞转 讬讙注 讜住转讜诐

The Sages taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving a person who opened his windows into a courtyard belonging to partners and came before Rabbi Yishmael bar Rabbi Yosei, who said to him: You have established an acquired privilege, my son; you have established an acquired privilege, and you may not be prevented from using the windows. And he came before Rabbi 岣yya, who said to him: You toiled and opened the windows; you must toil and seal them, as the partners have the right to prevent you from using these windows.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉

Rav Na岣an said:

Scroll To Top