was meant the tenants of an upper storey and that the reason why they are described as the GALLERY IS because they ascend to their quarters by way of the gallery, does it not clearly follow that any area that is accessible to one by means of lowering and to the other by means of throwing up is assigned to the one who uses it by means of lowering? — As R. Huna explains [below that the reference is] to those who dwelt on the gallery so [it may] also here [be explained that the reference is] to those who dwelt on the gallery. If so, read the final clause: AND ANY LOWER LEVEL BELONGS TO THE COURTYARD; but why, Seeing that it is easily accessible to both? — The meaning of TO THE COURTYARD is to the courtyard also, and both are forbidden access to it. This is also borne out by a process of reasoning, since in a subsequent clause It was stated: THIS, HOWEVER, APPLIES ONLY TO ONE THAT ADJOINS THE GALLERY, BUT ONE THAT IS REMOVED FROM IT, EVEN IF TEN HANDBREADTHS HIGH, BELONGS TO THE COURTYARD. For what could be the meaning of the phrase, TO THE COURTYARD? If it be suggested that the meaning is: To the courtyard and that its use is permitted, [it could be objected:]. Why, seeing that it is a domain common to the two of them? Consequently it must be admitted that TO THE COURTYARD means: To the courtyard also and that both are forbidden access to it, so it should here also be explained that the meaning of the phrase, TO THE COURTYARD is: To the courtyard also and that both are forbidden access to it. This is conclusive. We have learnt: THE BANK AROUND A CISTERN, OR A ROCK, THAT IS TEN HANDBREADTHS HIGH BELONGS TO THE GALLERY, BUT IF IT IS LOWER IT BELONGS TO THE COURTYARD! — R. Huna replied: [The meaning is], to those who dwelt on the gallery. This may be a satisfactory explanation in the case of the rock; what, however, can be said as regards A CISTERN? — R. Isaac son of Rab Judah replied: We are here dealing with the case of a cistern that was full of water. But is it not being diminished? — Since the use of the cistern is permitted when full it is also permitted when some of the water is wanting. On the contrary! Since Its use would be forbidden when it is not full should it not also be forbidden when full? Rather, explained Abaye, we are here dealing with a cistern that was full of fruit. Might not these also be diminished? — [It is a case] where they are tebel. A textual deduction leads to the same conclusion: Since it has been put on a par with ROCK. This is conclusive. But why should it be necessary to mention both CISTERN and ROCK? — Both are required. For if we had been informed of the law in the case of the ROCK only, the ruling might have been presumed to apply to that alone, since no preventive measure in that case could be called for, but that in the case of a cistern a preventive measure should be enacted, since it might sometimes be full of properly prepared fruit, hence both were required. Come and hear: If the tenants of a courtyard and the tenants of the upper storey forgot to prepare a joint ‘erub, the former may use the lower ten handbreadths and the latter may use the upper ten handbreadths. In what circumstances? If a bracket projected from the wall at a lower altitude than ten handbreadths it is assigned to the courtyard, but if it was higher than ten handbreadths it is assigned to the upper storey. Thus it follows, does it not, that the space intervening is forbidden? — R. Nahman replied: Here we are dealing with the case of a wall nineteen handbreadths high, from which a bracket projected. If [it projected] at a lower altitude than ten handbreadths, it is easily accessible to the one [group of tenants] while to the other [group it is only accessible] by means of lowering their things, but [if it projected] at a higher altitude [than ten handbreadths] it is easily accessible to the latter while to the former [it is accessible only] by means of thrusting.47ᵃᵇᶜᵈᵉᶠᵍʰⁱʲᵏˡᵐⁿᵒᵖᵠʳˢᵗᵘᵛʷˣʸᶻᵃᵃᵃᵇᵃᶜᵃᵈᵃᵉᵃᶠᵃᵍᵃʰᵃⁱᵃʲᵃᵏᵃˡᵃᵐᵃⁿᵃᵒᵃᵖᵃᵠᵃʳᵃˢᵃᵗᵃᵘ