Parallel
עירובין 8:2
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
but not where they were facing each other. According to Rabbah, however, who ruled [that a courtyard is] forbidden where the gaps were facing each other, how would he explain Rab's ruling? [Obviously, that it referred to a case where the gaps were] not facing one another [but then the question arises again:] What need was there for two [rulings on the same subject]? — If [the rulings were derived] from there it might have been assumed to apply only to the throwing [of objects into it], but not to the moving [of them within it]; hence we were informed [of Rab's ruling]. It was stated: If an alley is constructed in the form of a centipede, the shape of a doorway, said Abaye, is made [at the entrance] of the major alley and all the others are rendered ritually fit by means of a side-post and cross-beam. Said Raba to him: In agreement with whose view [is your ruling]? [If it is] in agreement with that of Samuel who ruled that [a crooked alley] has the same law as one that is closed [at one end], why should it be necessary to have the shape of a doorway? And, furthermore, was there not once a crooked alley at Nehardea and [in providing for its ritual fitness] Rab's view also was taken into consideration? [The fact,] however, is, said Raba, that the shape of a doorway is made [at the entrance] of each minor alley on the one side while the other side [of each minor alley] is rendered ritually fit by means of a side-post and cross-beam. Said R. Kahana b. Tahlifa in the name of R. Kahana b. Minyomi in the name of Rab Kahana b. Malkio who had it from R. Kahana the teacher of Rab [others say that R. Kahana b. Malkio is the same R. Kahana who was Rab's teacher]: If one side of an alley was long and the other short, [and the shortage is] less than four cubits, the cross-beam may be laid in a slanting position, [but if it is] four cubits the cross-beam is laid only at right angles to the shorter side. Raba said: In either case the beam must be laid only at right angles to the shorter side; and I can give my reason and also theirs. My reason is: [The erection of] a cross-beam was enacted in order [to provide] a distinguishing mark, and [a beam] in a slanting position provides no such mark. Their reason is: [The object of] a cross-beam was to provide a partition, and [a beam] in a slanting position is also a partition. R. Kahana remarked: As the ruling is reported in the name of Kahanas, I would say something about it. The rule that the beam may be laid in a slanting position applies only where the slant was no longer than ten cubits, but if it was longer than ten cubits all agree that it is placed only at right angles to the shorter side. The question was asked: May the space under a cross-beam be used? Rab and R. Hiyya and R. Johanan replied: It is permitted to use the space under the beam; Samuel, R. Simeon b. Rabbi and R. Simeon b. Lakish replied: It is forbidden to use the space under the beam. May it be assumed that they differ on the following principle? One Master is of the opinion that a cross-beam serves the purpose of a distinguishing mark, while the other Master holds that the cross-beam serves the purpose of a partition? — No; all may agree that a beam serves the purpose of a partition, but it is this principle on which they differ here. One Master holds that the distinguishing mark [is to serve as such for those who are] from within, and the other Master holds that it is for those who are without. And if you prefer I would reply: All agree that it serves the purpose of a partition, but it is this on which they differ here: One Master holds that its inner edge [is deemed to] descend and close up [the entrance] while the other Master maintains that it is its outer edge [that is deemed to] descend and close it up. R. Hisda stated: All agree that [the use of the space] between side-posts is forbidden. Rami b. Mama enquired of R. Hisda: What is the ruling where one Inserted two pins [respectively] in the two [extremities of the] walls of an alley on the outside and placed a beam on them? The other replied: According to him who permits [elsewhere the use of the space under the cross-beam the use of the space here] is forbidden; and according to him who forbids [the use elsewhere of such space, the use of it here] is permitted. Raba said: According to him also who forbids [the use of the space under the cross-beam the use of the alley here] is forbidden, since we require the beam to rest above the alley and this is not the case here. R. Adda b. Mattena raised an objection against Raba: If its cross-beam
—