Question: How is above 10 considered Reshus ha'Yachid? Goats can penetrate underneath! Even R. Yosi b'Ribi Chanina [who says that a basket four by four Tefachim on a pole in Reshus ha'Rabim is Reshus ha'Yachid] permits only when the Mechitzos [of the basket] surround [the pole]!

Answer #1: The case is, it is sealed under where it becomes vertical. Goats cannot penetrate [underneath].

Answer #2: The case is, the vertical ascent is 10 tall. It is considered Reshus ha'Yachid even though goats can penetrate, just like the wagons [used to carry the boards of the Mishkan], like it says in Shabbos (98a) that they are Reshus ha'Yachid, even though underneath is Reshus ha'Rabim.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): He can ascend on the tree until above 10 [Tefachim] and take [his Eruv], for the entire tree from 10 and above is Reshus ha'Yachid, and he can bring it to him, to the place of his Shevisah.

Explanation: Some say that [Rashi] means that also the air that is above 10, even above where [the tree] leans [horizontally], which was less than 10, is Reshus ha'Yachid.

Rejection: This never crossed Rashi's mind. It is not Reshus ha'Yachid, rather, Karmelis;

He explained that he brings it to the place of his Shevisah. This does not mean to the trunk of the tree, which is absolute Reshus ha'Rabim;

Even though his four Amos are considered Reshus ha'Yachid, this is only to consider that he and his Eruv are in one place. It is not considered Reshus ha'Yachid to permit to bring to there from Reshus ha'Yachid, or to forbid [bringing] from Reshus ha'Rabim [to] there, for it does not have Mechitzos and it is not a separate Reshus.

Explanation #1 (cont.): [The Gemara] answers that many people adjust loads on the branch where it leans, below 10. It is Reshus ha'Rabim, like Ula taught;

We hold that one who is Moshit (extends) from Reshus ha'Yachid to Reshus ha'Yachid through the air of Reshus ha'Rabim, even above 10, is liable, for a Mishnah in Shabbos (96a) says that if both were in one row, one who throws is exempt and one who passes is liable, for this was the Leviyim's service.

Note: Here, Rashi considers the four Amos around his Shevisah to be Reshus ha'Yachid. Above, Tosfos cited Rashi himself to say that it is Reshus ha'Yachid only to consider that he and his Eruv are in one place. Ba'al ha'Ma'or (Dapei ha'Rif 8a) asked this. I do not know why Tosfos did not ask this.

Remark (Tosfos): He is not Moshit. Rather, he is Ma'avir (transports) the Eruv afar, outside of four Amos (of where it was resting), and he is liable even if (the two Reshuyos ha'Yachid) are opposite each other. (Maharsha - Moshit is only when he is stationary, and extends the item. Karnei Re'em - Moshit is only through two people. Maharam - Moshit is only within four Amos.)

Source (Shabbos 97a): R. Elazar said that one who carries a load above 10 [Tefachim] is liable, for this is how Bnei Kehas carried. The place of Akirah and Hanachah is in Reshus ha'Yachid.

Question: Still, if he wanted, he could throw [the Eruv] until next to the place of his Shevisah, for one who throws is exempt!

Explanation #2 (Ri): [We ask that] if he wanted, he could bring [the Eruv] Derech Alav, i.e. put it on where the branch leans, which is Karmelis, and return and take it to the trunk, which is truly the place of his Shevisah;

[The Gemara] answers that many people adjust loads on it. Now, he cannot leave it on where the branch leans, for that is Hotza'ah from Reshus ha'Yachid to Reshus ha'Rabim.

Implied question: [We should say that it is an Eruv] Ho'il (since), if he wanted, he could throw [the Eruv] until Neged (10 Tefachim above) the place of his Shevisah!

Answer: We do not say so, since even when he throws it, it is still not an Eruv, only because his four Amos are considered Reshus ha'Yachid and ascend to Shamayim. Surely, we do not say "Ho'il" so much.

Question: Still, we find [how he could take the Eruv to the place of his Shevisah, and] he is not liable, e.g. one person does Akirah, and another does Hanachah!

Alternatively, when he gets to where it leans, he places it on his hand or on his shoulder above 10;

In Shabbos, we obligate one who passes above 10, only when it did not rest above 10. So we establish the case in Shabbos (8b) regarding a threshold [between two Reshuyos]. If one [in the middle] took from someone [in Reshus ha'Yachid] and gave to someone [in Reshus ha'Rabim, or vice-versa], and three are exempt;

We ask that this refutes Rava, who said that if one who transfers an item [four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim is liable, even if he carried it above 10 Tefachim], and answer that [in Rava's case] it did not rest [in the middle]. Here, it rested [in the middleman's hands].

Answer: In all of these ways, since he can easily come to an Isur Torah, even Rebbi agrees that Chachamim decreed Bein ha'Shemashos, like it says below (34b) about a soft reed, that [Rebbi] decrees lest he break it.

Explanation: Since the tree is Reshus ha'Yachid, the basket is a hole of Reshus ha'Yachid, and in holes of Reshus ha'Yachid there is no concern if goats can penetrate.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): Even though at the top it is 4, it is not Reshus ha'Yachid, since it is not four wide at the bottom. It is Reshus ha'Yachid only if it begins to be four wide within three of the ground.

Rebuttal: In Shabbos (101a), it says that a pillar 10 [Tefachim] tall, and at the top it is four wide, if below it is three [Tefachim] wide, if one threw and it landed on top, he is liable. Since it is three wide, goats do not penetrate!

Explanation #2: [Rather,] we must say that it is not three wide below.

Question: What is the case of the basket?

If it is even with the top of the tree, or it hangs below, less than three [Tefachim] from the top of the tree, why do we need Chakikah (to view it as if a cavity was carved out in the tree)?

And if it hangs three below the top of the tree, why did we ask above "if it is four, even if he put it on the basket, what does this do?" It is not considered Reshus ha'Yachid even if the tree is four, if not due to Chakikah, for it is far from the top of the tree!

Answer: The case is, the opening of the basket is even with the top of the tree. Therefore, it is a hole of Reshus ha'Yachid. The Eruv is in the bottom of the basket, which is distanced three [from the top]. Therefore, Chakikah is needed.

Implied question: Why didn't [Ravina] establish that the Eruv is in the opening of the basket, or the basket is four wide, but even so it is not Reshus ha'Yachid, because gpn?

Answer: If so, [the Beraisa] did not teach anything through the case of a basket. It should teach about a pillar four wide at the top, and below it is not three wide!

Implied question: It teaches that Tzedadin (things on a tree) are forbidden.

Answer: It should not have taught that here, since it does not teach anything about Eruv!

Rather, surely it mentioned a basket to teach that Chokekim Lehashlim, and we need an Eruv on a place four [by four].

Question: Still, why must [Ravina] say at all "he holds like R. Meir and he holds like R. Yehudah"? He should say that really, we do not need an Eruv on a place four by four. Here, the basket is even with the top of the tree;

The Chidush is, it is not considered Reshus ha'Yachid, even according to R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah, who considers a basket [on a pole] to be Reshus ha'Yachid, because there, the Mechitzos surround [the pole]!

Answer: It connotes to him that only if he put it in the basket it is an Eruv, but if he put it on the top of the tree, it is not an Eruv;

Since it taught "if he put it in the basket", and did not teach "he hung a basket on a tree and put his Eruv there", you are forced to say that the interior of the bottom of the basket is distanced three from the top of the tree.

Observation: According to Seforim that say below "there, the Mechitzos surround [the pole]. Regarding a beam, the Mechitzos do not surround', this connotes that it refers to the Beraisa of one who inserted a beam, and it connotes to [the Makshan] that we discuss even outside his four Amos, similar to the case of our Mishnah...

Even so, it is an Eruv. Since it is not three [wide] underneath, even though at the top it is four wide, it is not Reshus ha'Yachid, because goats penetrate. This is why it says 'this is unlike R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah.'

Explanation #1 (Rashbam): This Amora holds like Rabanan, who say in Shabbos (92a) that Eged Kli Shmei Eged (something in a Kli is considered to be partially in the Reshus of the Kli);

Since Eged (it is in a) Kli above 10, when the Eruv rests below 10, there is no Isur Hotza'ah in this Hanachah, and after it rests in Reshus ha'Rabim, he can take it and eat it.

Explanation #2: However, even it is not considered Eged, there is no Isur Hotza'ah, since it rested in the basket below 10, which is Karmelis, if it is four wide, and there is no Isur Torah through tilting it.

Implied question: According to Rashi, who explained above (33a) regarding a tree that leans outside four Amos, that below 10 it is an Eruv since he could bring it less than four Amos at a time [why must he take his Eruv to the desired place of Shevisah? It should suffice Ho'il (since) if he wanted, he could take it!]

Answer: He must distinguish between this Ho'il and that Ho'il.

Explanation (Rashi): He brings it [to the desired place of Shevisah] through a Shali'ach. If he himself took it, even without bread he acquired Shevisah!

Remark: He explained so, because below (51b) we rule like Rav Nachman, and according to R. Yehudah, that both an Oni and Ashir can be Me'arev through their legs (going to the desired place of Shevisah, even without bread).