Parallel
עירובין 3:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
for what we learned [in respect of height refers to the] interior of the sukkah and to the empty space of the entrance. Said R. Papa to Raba: A Baraitha was taught which provides support for your view: ‘[A cross-beam over] an entrance [to a blind alley] that is higher than twenty cubits [and is thus] higher than the entrance to the Hekal should be lowered’. Now in the Hekal itself the [height of the] hollow space of [the entrance thereto] was twenty cubits. R. Shimi b. Ashi raised an objection against R. Papa: ‘How does one construct [the prescribed entrance]? One places the cross-beam, below the limit of twenty [cubits of its altitude]’. Read: ‘Above’. But surely it is stated: ‘below’? — It was this that we are informed: That the lowest [permitted altitude is to be measured on the same principle] as the highest. As in the case of the highest [altitude permitted] the hollow space [of the entrance must not exceed] twenty cubits, so also in the case of the lowest [altitude permitted], the hollow space [of the entrance must not be lower than] ten cubits. Abaye stated in the name of R. Nahman: The cubit [applicable to the measurements] of a sukkah and that applicable to an ‘entrance’ is one of five [handbreadths]. The cubit [applicable to the laws] of kil'ayim is one of six [handbreadths]. In respect of what legal [restriction has it been ruled that] the cubit [applicable to the measurements] of an entrance is [only] one of five? [If it be suggested] in respect of its height and [of the size of] a breach in the alley, surely [it could be retorted] is there [not also the law on] the depth of an alley, that [must be no less than] four cubits, in which case [the adoption of the smaller cubit results in] a relaxation [of the law]? — [He holds the same view] as does he who limits the depth to four handbreadths. If you prefer I might reply [that the depth of an alley must indeed be] four cubits, but he spoke of the majority of cubit measurements. In respect of what legal [restriction has R. Nahman ruled that] the cubit [applicable to the measurements] of a sukkah is one of five? [If it be suggested,] in respect of its height and [the permitted size of] a crooked wall, surely [it might be objected is there [not also the law requiring] the area of the sukkah [to be four cubits] by four cubits, in which case [the adoption of the smaller cubit results in] a relaxation [of the law]? For was it not taught: Rabbi said: ‘I maintain that any sukkah which does not contain [an area of] four cubits by four cubits is legally unfit’? [R. Nahman is of the same opinion] as the Rabbis who ruled [that a sukkah is valid] even if it accommodates no more than one's head, the greater part of one's body and a table. And if you prefer I might reply: It may, in fact, [be in agreement with the view of] Rabbi, but he spoke of the majority of cubit measurements. In respect of what legal [restrictions has R. Nahman ruled that] ‘the cubit [applicable to the laws] of kil'ayim is one of six’? — In respect of a patch in a vineyard and the [uncultivated] border of a vineyard; for we have learnt: [Each side of] a patch in a vineyard, Beth Shammai ruled, must measure no less than twenty-four cubits, and Beth Hillel ruled: Sixteen cubits; and [the width of] an [uncultivated] border of a vineyard, Beth Shammai ruled, [must] measure no less than sixteen cubits, and Beth Hillel ruled: Twelve cubits. What is meant by a patch in a vineyard? The barren portion of the interior of the vineyard. [If its sides] do not measure sixteen cubits, no seed may be sown there, but if they do measure sixteen cubits, sufficient space for the tillage of the vineyard is allowed and the remaining space may be sown. And what is meant by the border of a vineyard? [The space] between the [actual] vineyard and the surrounding fence. [If the width] is less than twelve cubits no seed may be sown there, but if it measures twelve cubits, sufficient space for the tillage of the vineyard is allowed and the remaining area may be sown. But, surely, there is [the case of vines planted] closely within four cubits [distance from one another] where [the adoption of the higher standard would result] in a relaxation [of the law]? For have we not learnt: A vineyard [the rows of which are] planted at [distances of] less than four cubits [from one another] is not regarded, R. Simeon ruled, as a proper vineyard, and the Sages ruled, [It is regarded as] a proper vineyard, the intervening vines being treated as if they were non-existent? — [R. Nahman is of the same opinion] as the Rabbis who ruled that [whatever the distances the plantation] constitutes a proper vineyard. If you prefer I might reply: [He may,] in fact, [hold the view of] R. Simeon, but he was referring to the majority of cubit measurements. Raba, however, stated in the name of R. Nahman: All cubits [prescribed for legal measurements are] of the size of six [handbreadths], but the latter are expanded while the former are compact. An objection was raised: All cubits of which the Sages spoke are of the standard of six [handbreadths] except
—