MISHNAH. IF FIVE COMPANIES SPENT THE SABBATH IN ONE HALL EACH COMPANY, BETH SHAMMAI RULED, MUST CONTRIBUTE SEPARATELY TO THE ERUB; BUT BETH HILLEL RULED: ALL OF THEM CONTRIBUTE TO THE ‘ERUB ONLY ONE SHARE.
THEY AGREE, HOWEVER, THAT WHERE SOME OF THEM OCCUPY ROOMS OR UPPER CHAMBERS A SEPARATE CONTRIBUTION TO THE ‘ERUB MUST BE MADE FOR EACH COMPANY.
The Hall described is a kind of hotel, where each room is part of the whole but has its own partitions and door out to the courtyard.
The dispute between Hillel and Shammai is unclear and is discussed thoughout the page. Is it a question of the size of partition for each room? R. Nachaman imagines the partitions as being mere stakes in the floor. R. Hiyya and R. Simeon imagine the difference between partitions which reach almost, but not quite, to the ceiling.
Is the contribution one for each room, or one for each individual? Or is this an issue of transfer?
A Tanna taught: This applies only where their ‘erub is carried into a place other [than the hall]. But if their ‘erub is remaining with them all agree that one contribution to the ‘erub suffices for all of them.
This is seen as Hillel’s position.
Others read: This applies only where the ‘erub remained with them, but if they carried their ‘erub to a place other [than their hall] all agree that a separate contribution to the ‘erub is required for each company.
Whose view is followed in which was taught: If five residents who collected their contributions to an ‘erub desired to transfer it to another place one ‘erub suffices for all of them? — Whose view? No one's.
Let’s hear it for “no one” !