בבא בתרא נט

בבא בתרא נט

תְּנַן: ״הַמַּזְחֵילָה יֵשׁ לָהּ חֲזָקָה״. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר הָנָךְ תַּרְתֵּי – שַׁפִּיר.

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 Ḥanina, 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.

אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר שֶׁאִם רָצָה לִבְנוֹת תַּחְתָּיו בּוֹנֶה, מַאי נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מִינַּהּ?

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?

הָכָא בְּמַזְחֵילָה שֶׁל בִּנְיָן עָסְקִינַן, דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: לָא נִיחָא לִי דְּתִתְּרַע אֲשִׁיתַאי.

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.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: צִינּוֹר הַמְקַלֵּחַ מַיִם לַחֲצַר חֲבֵרוֹ, וּבָא בַּעַל הַגָּג לְסוֹתְמוֹ, בַּעַל הֶחָצֵר מְעַכֵּב עָלָיו, דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: כִּי הֵיכִי דְּאַתְּ קַנְיָא לָךְ חָצֵר דִּידִי לְמִשְׁדֵּא בֵּיהּ מַיָּא, לְדִידִי נָמֵי קְנֵי לִי מַיָּא דְּאִיגָּרָךְ.

Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: With regard to a pipe from which water is draining into another’s 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.

אִיתְּמַר, רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא אָמַר: מְעַכֵּב. רַבִּי חָמָא, אָמַר: אֵינוֹ מְעַכֵּב. אֲזַל שַׁיְילֵיהּ לְרַבִּי בֵּיסָא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: מְעַכֵּב. קָרֵי עֲלֵיהּ רָמֵי בַּר חָמָא: ״וְהַחוּט הַמְשֻׁלָּשׁ לֹא בִמְהֵרָה יִנָּתֵק״ – זֶה רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי חָמָא בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי בֵּיסָא.

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 Ḥama, Rabbi Oshaya’s father, says: He cannot prevent it. Rabbi Oshaya went and asked Rabbi Ḥama’s father, Rabbi Bisa. Rabbi Bisa said to them: He can prevent it. Rami bar Ḥama read the verse about him: “And if a man prevail against him that is alone, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12), saying that this applies to Rabbi Oshaya, son of Rabbi Ḥama, 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.

סוּלָּם הַמִּצְרִי אֵין לוֹ חֲזָקָה. הֵיכִי דָּמֵי סוּלָּם הַמִּצְרִי? אָמְרִי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יַנַּאי: כֹּל שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אַרְבָּעָה חֲווֹקִין.

§ 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.

חַלּוֹן הַמִּצְרִית אֵין לָהּ חֲזָקָה כּוּ׳. מַאי שְׁנָא גַּבֵּי סוּלָּם דְּלָא מְפָרֵשׁ, וּמַאי שְׁנָא גַּבֵּי חַלּוֹן דִּמְפָרֵשׁ? מִשּׁוּם דְּקָא בָּעֵי אִיפְּלוֹגֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּסֵיפָא.

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.

אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: לְמַטָּה מֵאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת – יֵשׁ לוֹ חֲזָקָה, וְיָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת; לְמַעְלָה מֵאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת – אֵין לוֹ חֲזָקָה, וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת. וְרַבִּי אִילְעָא אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ לְמַעְלָה מֵאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת – אֵין לוֹ חֲזָקָה, וְיָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת.

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’a 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.

לֵימָא בְּכוֹפִין עַל מִדַּת סְדוֹם קָא מִיפַּלְגִי – דְּמָר סָבַר: כּוֹפִין, וּמַר סָבַר: אֵין כּוֹפִין?

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’a, holds that there is no coercion.

לָא; דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא כּוֹפִין, וְשָׁאנֵי הָכָא – דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִימְנִין דְּמוֹתְבַתְּ שַׁרְשִׁיפָא תּוּתָךְ, וְקָיְימַתְּ וְקָא חָזֵית. הָהוּא דַּאֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי. שַׁדְּרֵיהּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר מֶמֶל, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: עֲבֵיד לֵיהּ כְּרַבִּי אִילְעָא.

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’a 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’a.

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: וּלְאוֹרָה – אֲפִילּוּ כָּל שֶׁהוּא יֵשׁ לוֹ חֲזָקָה.

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.

מַתְנִי׳ הַזִּיז; עַד טֶפַח – יֵשׁ לוֹ חֲזָקָה,

MISHNA: With regard to a projection emerging from the wall of one’s 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,

וְיָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת. פָּחוֹת מִטֶּפַח – אֵין לוֹ חֲזָקָה, וְאֵין יָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת.

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.

גְּמָ׳ אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר רַבִּי מָנִי, וְאָמְרִי לָהּ אָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב אָמַר רַבִּי מָנִי: הֶחְזִיק בְּטֶפַח – הֶחְזִיק בְּאַרְבַּע. מַאי קָאָמַר? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, הָכִי קָאָמַר: הֶחְזִיק רוֹחַב טֶפַח בְּמֶשֶׁךְ אַרְבַּע – הֶחְזִיק בְּרוֹחַב אַרְבַּע.

GEMARA: Rabbi Asi says that Rabbi Mani says, and some say that Rabbi Ya’akov 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.

פָּחוֹת מִטֶּפַח – אֵין לוֹ חֲזָקָה, וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת. אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בַּעַל הַגָּג בְּבַעַל הֶחָצֵר, אֲבָל בַּעַל הֶחָצֵר בְּבַעַל הַגָּג – יָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת. וְרַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ בַּעַל חָצֵר בְּבַעַל הַגָּג, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְמַחוֹת.

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’s 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.

לֵימָא בְּהֶיזֵּק רְאִיָּה קָמִיפַּלְגִי – דְּמָר סָבַר: שְׁמֵיהּ הֶיזֵּק, וּמָר סָבַר: לָאו שְׁמֵיהּ הֶיזֵּק?

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’s courtyard when using this projection, and one Sage, Rav Yehuda, holds that it is not considered to be damage.

לָא; דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא שְׁמֵיהּ הֶיזֵּק; וְשָׁאנֵי הָכָא, דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: לְתַשְׁמִישְׁתָּא – לָא חֲזֵי; לְמַאי חֲזֵי – לְמִתְלֵא בֵּיהּ מִידֵּי; מַהְדַּרְנָא אַפַּאי וְתָלֵינָא בֵּיהּ.

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.

וְאִידַּךְ – אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִימְנִין דִּבְעִיתַתְּ.

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.

מַתְנִי׳ לֹא יִפְתַּח אָדָם חַלּוֹנוֹתָיו לַחֲצַר הַשּׁוּתָּפִין. לָקַח בַּיִת בְּחָצֵר אַחֶרֶת – לֹא יִפְתָּחֶנָּה בַּחֲצַר הַשּׁוּתָּפִין. בָּנָה עֲלִיָּיה עַל גַּבֵּי בֵּיתוֹ – לֹא יִפְתָּחֶנָּה לַחֲצַר הַשּׁוּתָּפִין; אֶלָּא אִם רָצָה – בּוֹנֶה אֶת הַחֶדֶר לְפָנִים מִבֵּיתוֹ, וּבוֹנֶה עֲלִיָּיה עַל גַּבֵּי בֵּיתוֹ, וּפוֹתְחָהּ לְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ.

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.

גְּמָ׳ מַאי אִירְיָא לַחֲצַר הַשּׁוּתָּפִין? אֲפִילּוּ לַחֲצַר חֲבֵירוֹ נָמֵי לָא!

GEMARA: With regard to the mishna’s 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’s courtyard either, as it will lead to damage caused by sight.

לָא מִיבַּעְיָא קָאָמַר – לָא מִיבַּעְיָא לַחֲצַר חֲבֵרוֹ דְּלָא, אֲבָל לַחֲצַר הַשּׁוּתָּפִין, דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: סוֹף סוֹף הָא קָא בָּעֵית אִצְטְנוֹעֵי מִינַּאי בֶּחָצֵר; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: עַד הָאִידָּנָא – בֶּחָצֵר הֲוָה בָּעֵינָא אִצְטְנוֹעֵי מִינָּךְ, הַשְׁתָּא – אֲפִילּוּ בַּבַּיִת נָמֵי בָּעֵינָא אִצְטְנוֹעֵי מִינָּךְ.

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’s 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.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאָדָם אֶחָד שֶׁפָּתַח חַלּוֹנָיו לַחֲצַר הַשּׁוּתָּפִין; וּבָא לִפְנֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בַּר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אָמַר לוֹ: הֶחְזַקְתָּ בְּנִי, הֶחְזַקְתָּ; וּבָא לִפְנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא, אָמַר: יָגַעְתָּ וּפָתַחְתָּ, יְגַע וּסְתוֹם.

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 Ḥiyya, 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.

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן:

Rav Naḥman said: