Parallel
עירובין 5:1
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
while he who said ‘four handbreadths’, is of the opinion that it is forbidden to make use [of the floor space] under the beam? — No; all may agree that it is permissible to make use [of floor space] under the cross-beam, but here they differ on the following principles: One Master holds the opinion that a cross-beam [is required] on account [of the necessity for] a distinguishing mark; while the other Master holds that a cross-beam [is required] on account [of the necessity for] a partition. If you prefer I might reply that all agree that a cross-beam [is required] on account [of the necessity for] a distinguishing mark; but here they differ on [the question whether] the distinguishing mark below [must be of the same dimensions as] the one above. One Master is of the opinion that we say that a distinguishing mark below [is provided by the same width] as the one above, and the other Master holds that we do not say that a distinguishing mark below [is provided by the same dimensions] as the one above. And if you prefer I might reply that all agree that a distinguishing mark below [is provided by the same width] as the one above, but their point of difference here is [the question whether a wider space was ordered] as a preventive measure against the possibility of its being trodden down. [If an entrance to an alley] was less than ten handbreadths [in height] and it was desired to dig up the ground so as to bring up the altitude to ten [handbreadths] how much must one excavate? — [You ask] , ‘How much must one excavate’? As much [of course] as one requires! — Rather [this is the question:] To what extent in width [must one excavate]? — R. Joseph replied: To four [handbreadths]. Abaye replied: To four cubits. Might it be suggested that they differ on the principle laid down by R. Ammi and R. Assi? For it was stated: If a breach was made in a side-wall of an alley close to its entrance, it was ruled in the name of R. Ammi and R. Assi, if a strip of [the width of] four [handbreadths] was there it is permissible [to regard the alley as ritually fit], provided the breach is not wider than ten [cubits]. If, however, [there was] no [such strip there] it is permissible [to regard the alley as ritually fit, if the breach was] less than three [handbreadths wide], [but if it was] three [handbreadths wide] this is not permissible. [Might it then be suggested that] R. Joseph adopts the principle of R. Ammi and that Abaye does not hold the principle of R. Ammi? Abaye can answer you: There [it is a question of] destroying the ritual fitness of an alley, but here [it is a case of] creating one. [Consequently] if the excavation extends [to a width of] four cubits [the entrance becomes] ritually fit, but if not, it is not [fit]. Said Abaye: Whence do I derive my ruling? From what was taught: ‘[The movement of objects in] an alley cannot be permitted [on the Sabbath] by means of a sidepost and a crossbeam unless houses and courtyards open out into it’. Now if [a strip of the width] of four [handbreadths were to constitute a proper alley wall) how could this be possible? And should you reply that the doors might open in the middle wall, the fact is [it could be retorted] that R. Nahman stated: We have a tradition that if [the movement of objects in] an alley is to be permitted [on the Sabbath] by means of a side-post and a crossbeam, its length must be more than its width and houses and courtyards must open out into it. And R. Joseph? — Each door might open in a corner. Abaye further stated: Whence do I derive my ruling? From what Rami b. Hama said in the name of R. Huna: If a projection from [the end of a side] wall of an alley is less than four cubits [in width] it may be regarded as a side-post and no other post is required to effect the ritual fitness of the alley, [but if it is] four cubits [wide] it is deemed to be [a part of the structure of the] alley, and another post is required to effect its ritual fitness. And R. Joseph? — To deprive [a projection] of its status as a post there must be [a width of] four cubits but as regards constituting [a wall in] an alley, even [a width] of four handbreadths is also [enough] to constitute an alley. [Reverting to] the above text, ‘Rami b. Hama said in the name of R. Huna: If a projection from [the end of a side] wall of an alley
—