Rif Yomi Weekly Edition {Eruvin 31a - 38a}

This coming week's Rif Yomi, from Eruvin 31a to 38a, fits on a single side of a page. It contains the Rif Yomi from tomorrow, Shabbat, Nov 5, 2005, to next Shabbat, Nov 12, 2005. It may be download here.

Update: Changed to fix 3 typos (closet was spelled closed, grain -> produce)

Rif Eruvin 8a {Eruvin 31a ... 34b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
8a

{Eruvin 31a}
Mishna:
We may make an eruv with demai¹, and with maaser rishon from which teruma² had been taken off, and from maaser sheni and hekdesh which had been redeemed; and the Kohanim with challah and teruma
but not with tevel³, nor with maaser rishon from which teruma had not been taken off, nor with maaser rishon or hekdesh that had not been redeemed.

{Eruvin 31b}
If ones sends his eruv {techumin - at a distance up to 2000 cubits from him, to establish his 2000 cubit Shabbat boundary} in the hands of a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor, or in the hands of one who does admit the lawfulness of an eruv, it is not an eruv. And if he tells someone to accept it from that person {at the destination}, it is an eruv.

Gemara:
"If ones sends his eruv in the hands of a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor":
We establish this as referring to an eruv techumin, but in the case of an eruv chatzerot {of courtyards}, one who sends it in the hands of a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor, it is an eruv, for we establish like Rav Huna that a minor may collect an eruv.

"And if he tells someone to accept it from that person, it is an eruv":
But let us be concerned that he does not reach him!
We are speaking of case in which he stands and watches him.
But let us be concerned that the other fellow does not take it from him!
There is an assumption {chazaka} that an agent does his assigned task.

{Eruvin 32b}
Mishna:
If he placed it {=the eruv} in a tree, higher than ten handbreadths, it is not an eruv; lower than ten handbreadths, it is an eruv.
If he placed it in a pit, even at a depth of 100 cubits, it is a valid eruv.

{Eruvin 34b}
If he placed it at the top of a reed or at the top of a pole, if it was detached and then inserted {into the ground}, even if 100 cubits high.

---

Footnotes:
1: =produce where we are unsure that maaser has been taken off
2: = terumat maaser
3: = food from which teruma and maaser had not been taken

Rif Eruvin 7b {Eruvin 26a continues ... 30a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
7b
{Eruvin 26a continues}
except for water and salt.
One who vows {to refrain} from mazon is permitted water and salt.

We may make an eruv {chatzeirot} for a Nazir with wine, and for an Israelite with teruma.
Symmacus says: With Chullin and not with teruma.

And for a Cohen in a bet haPras¹.

{Eruvin 27a}
Rabbi Yehuda says: Even in a cemetary, because he can (go) outside and eat.

Gemara:
Rabbi Yochanan said: We do not learn from general rules (klalot), even when they utilize the expression "except for."

Ravina, and some say Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, said: We too, learned it {tanina}: With all {kinds of food} we may make an eruv {of courtyards} and a shittuf {of alleyways}, except with water and salt.
But are there not mushrooms (כמהין ופטריות) which we may not use to make an eruv?
We may deduce from here that we do not learn from general rules, even when they utilize the expression "except for." We indeed do so deduce.

"Except for water and salt":
And specifically water by itself, and salt by itself. But water and salt together, we may make an eruv.

{Eruvin 29a}
They learnt {in a brayta}: All foods combine to render a man unfit to eat teruma in the amount of half a peras {=2 egg volumes}, and to food for two meals for an eruv, and an egg's volume to be rendered impure from food impurity.

Rav Yosef thought to say that this that they learnt "and to food for two meals for an eruv" means that there is a meal from this one {food} and a meal from that one.
Rabba said to him: Even a half, a third, or a fourth.

A certain member of the Rabbinate said to Rava: Apples, how much {to make an eruv}?
And we conclude: Rav Nachman said to him: Apples, in the amount of a kav.

They learnt {in a brayta}: Rabbi Shimon ben Eleazar says: A measure {uchla} of spices, a litra of herbs {yerek}, ten nuts, five persicum {=apricots}, two pomegranates, one etrog². And so too for an eruv.

To explain: This that we learn "an uchla of spices" etc., just as we learn in the Mishna that we do not give a poor man at the threshing floor less than half a kav of wheat, and half a kav of barley, etc..

They learnt {in a brayta}: Rabbi Shimon ben Eleazar says: Wine, enough with which to eat two meals. Vinegar, enough to dip into it. Olives and onions, enough to eat two meals.
And this wine of which we spoke is cooked wine {mevushal}, but wine which is uncooked, we may make an eruv with two reviit. And the onions, too, only the actual onion, but the leaves, no. {For they are not good to eat - perhaps even dangerous.}

{Eruvin 29b}
And the {onion}leaves that we said one may not make with them an eruv, this is only when they have not grown a zeret {the length of the span of fingers}, but if they have grown a zeret, we may make an eruv with it.

Rav Yehuda cited Shmuel: Whatever is classified as liftan {=a dip}, such that one would eat with two meals. And whatever is not classified as liftan, but rather is eaten as it is, such that one may eat from it two meals.
Raw meat, such that one may eat from it two meals.
Roasted meat --
Rabba said: Such that one may eat with it two meals.
And Rav Yosef said: Such that one may eat from it two meals.

And the halacha is like Rabba.

{Eruvin 30a}
Rav Shimi bar Chiyya said: We may make an eruv with raw eggs.
And how many?
Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said: Sinai {=Rav Yosef} said: Two.

---

Footnotes:
1: Kahati: If a grave has been plowed over in a field, the area of the 100 amot surrounding the grave is called "bet haperas," i.e., the entire area may be unclean owing to the corpse. By Rabbinic law, its earth imparts uncleanness by contact or when carried, for we fear that the plow dragged with it a bone the size of a barley-corn from the corpse.
2: This was a prescribed quantity for giving charity by the owner of a vineyard.

Rif Yomi Weekly Edition {Eruvin 23a-31b}

This is intended as a new feature. One 2 page (or 2 sides of a page) Word Document that contains all the Rif for the coming week. I've been distributing these as alternatives to parsha sheets in local shuls. A 10-20 minute read covers the entire week, or pace yourself and read each day's portion in its time.

The Word Document, covering Eruvin 23a-31b (and thus Friday, Oct 28, 2005 until Shabbat, Nov 5, 2005) may be downloaded here.

Rif Eruvin 7a {Eruvin 23b continues ... 26a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
7a

{Eruvin 23b continues}
And if he had only let it be heard that the halacha was like Rabbi Akiva, I would have believed that if it is long and narrow, no. Therefore he informs us that the halacha is like Rabbi Yossi, such that it is the case even if it is long and narrow.

{Eruvin 24a}
Rav Nachman cited Shmuel: A {wood-}shed greater than a bet satayim {the space needed to grow 2 seah of grain} which was not fenced in for the purpose of habitation, how should he conduct himself {to allow carrying therein}? He should breach in it a breach wider than 10 cubits, and then fence it in such that the breach is 10 cubits {or less} for the purposes of habitation, and it is sufficient, for it is reckoned as if it was entirely fenced in for habitation, and it is permitted to carry therein, for it is like a courtyard.

{Eruvin 23a}
Mishna:
Rabbi Illai said: I heard from Rabbi Eliezer that even if it is a bet kor {a larger area, the amount needed to grow a kor}.
And I also heard from him: If one of the residents of a courtyard forgot to make an {= join in the joint} eruv {chatzerot}, his house is forbidden to him to carry in and out of it, but to them {the other residents of the courtyard}, it is permitted.
And I also heard from him: People may fulfill their obligation {of eating maror} on Pesach by eating harts-tongue {or palm ivy}.
However, a went around to all his students finding a fellow {who said the same in his name} and I found none.

{Eruvin 25b}
Gemara:
{The Mishna had said:} "And I also heard from him: If one of the residents of a courtyard...":
But we learnt {vehatania - our gemara vehatnan - a reference to the Mishna on Eruvin 69b}: His house is forbidden to carry in and out, both for him and for them!
Rav Huna bar Chinena said {our gemara: Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua cited Rav Sheshet}: This is no difficulty. This {our Mishna} is Rabbi Eliezer and this {the later Mishna} in the Sages.

{Eruvin 26a}
Rav Sheshet said: On consideration you will find that based on the statement of Rabbi Eliezer, if he {the tenant of the courtyard who forgot} nullifies his rights in the courtyard, his rights in his house is also nullifed. And according to the words of the Sages, if he nullifies his rights in the courtyard, his rights in his house is not nullified.
And five people who live in one courtyard, and one of them forgot and did not make an {= join in the} eruv, according to Rabbi Eliezer, when he nullifies his rights, he need not nullify his rights to every single one. According to the Sages, when he nullifies his rights, he needs to nullify his rights to each and every one. And if he reveals his intent and states: I nullify my rights to my courtyard and my rights to my house, even according to the Sages, since he revealed his intent, it is revealed, and in fact nullified.

End Perek Two - osin pasin

Begin Perek Three

Mishna:
With all {kinds of food} we may make an eruv {of courtyards} and a shittuf {of alleyways}, except with water and salt.
And all {kinds of food} may be acquired with the money of maaser sheni

Rif Eruvin 6b {Eruvin 21a continues ... 23b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
6b
{Eruvin 21a continues}
They say that you travel from Barnish to the synagogue of Daniel, which is a distance of 3 parsa {=more than techum Shabbat}. Upon what do you rely? Upon isolated huts? But your father's father, citing Rav, said that the law of isolated huts does not apply in Bavel! {In response,} He went out and showed him {ruined} settlements that were within the radius of seventy cubits and a fraction from the town {which would extend the city before the techum began}.

{Eruvin 23a}
Mishna:
And Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava further said: In a garden or a wood-shed, which is 70 cubits and a fraction X 70 cubits and a fraction, surrounded by a wall 10 handbreadths high, one may carry therein, provided there is a watchman's hut or a dwelling place, or that it is near to a town.
Rabbi Yehuda says: Even if it contains only a cistern, ditch, or cave, one may carry therein.
Rabbi Akiva says: Even if there is not one of any of the aforementioned, one may carry therein, provided it is only 70 cubits and a fraction X 70 cubits and a fraction.

Rabbi Eliezer says: If its length exceeds its width even a single cubit, we may not carry therein.
Rabbi Yossi says: Even if its length is twice its width, we may carry therein.

{Eruvin 23b}
Gemara:
Rabbi Akiva is identical with the Tanna Kamma {=the Sages on the Mishna, 18b, who made a similar statement with no qualifications}!
This is the difference between them: A small area.
For they learnt {in a brayta}: Rabbi Yehuda says: {A bet satayim} exceeds by a small area 70 cubits and a fraction, but the Sages did not give an exact dimension. And how much is satayim? Like the courtyard of the Mishkan.

"Rabbi Eliezer says {If its length exceeds its width even a single cubit}...":
But we learnt {in a brayta}: If its length is exceeds twice its width by even a single cubit, we may not carry therein.
Rav Bibi bar Abaye said: In our Mishna, learn also more than twice its width.
If so, this is identical with Rabbi Yossi!
This is the distinction between them: in terms of the square area of the Sages.

To explain: It is a reference to this that we learnt {in the Mishna in Eruvin 49b}: {The techum of 2000 cubits is a radius of 2000 cubits from his spot - that is, it is} round - these are the words of Rabbi Chanina ben Antigonus. And the Sages say that it is squared out like a square tablet, such that he profits the corners {which strictly speaking are more than 2000 cubits from where he stands}.
According to Rabbi Eliezer who said that if its length exceeds twice its width by even a single cubit, we may not carry therein, we measure its diagonal, and if its diagonal exceeds twice its width by even a single cubit, we may not carry therein, for he holds like Rabbi Chanina ben Antigonus who says that we need a circular techum Shabbat {defined by the radius - thus, the radius horizontally is matches to the diagonal radius} and not squared. And according to Rabbi Yossi, we measure it in its rectangular dimensions, for he holds like the Sages who say it {the techum} is square. Therefore, if its length is equal twice its width, like the courtyard of the Mishkan, as it states {Shemot 27:18}:

יח אֹרֶךְ הֶחָצֵר מֵאָה בָאַמָּה וְרֹחַב חֲמִשִּׁים בַּחֲמִשִּׁים, וְקֹמָה חָמֵשׁ אַמּוֹת--שֵׁשׁ מָשְׁזָר; וְאַדְנֵיהֶם, נְחֹשֶׁת.

18 The length of the court shall be a hundred cubits, and the breadth fifty every where, and the height five cubits, of fine twined linen, and their sockets of brass.

we may carry therein, and if it exceeds this, we may not carry therein.
And the reason of Rabbi Chanina ben Antigonus and the reason of the Sages in this dispute is detailed in perek Mi sheHotziuhu Nochrim {in Eruvin 51a} that we learn the 2000 cubits as the techum Shabbat via a gezera shava from this pasuk {Bemidbar 35:5}:

ה וּמַדֹּתֶם מִחוּץ לָעִיר, אֶת-פְּאַת-קֵדְמָה אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֶת-פְּאַת-נֶגֶב אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֶת-פְּאַת-יָם אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֵת פְּאַת צָפוֹן אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה--וְהָעִיר בַּתָּוֶךְ; זֶה יִהְיֶה לָהֶם, מִגְרְשֵׁי הֶעָרִים.

5 And ye shall measure without the city for the east side two thousand cubits, and for the south side two thousand cubits, and for the west side two thousand cubits, and for the north side two thousand cubits, the city being in the midst. This shall be to them the open land about the cities.

Rabbi Chanina ben Antigonus says {same pasuk}:

ה וּמַדֹּתֶם מִחוּץ לָעִיר, אֶת-פְּאַת-קֵדְמָה אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֶת-פְּאַת-נֶגֶב אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֶת-פְּאַת-יָם אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֵת פְּאַת צָפוֹן אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה--וְהָעִיר בַּתָּוֶךְ; זֶה יִהְיֶה לָהֶם, מִגְרְשֵׁי הֶעָרִים.

5 And ye shall measure without the city for the east side two thousand cubits, and for the south side two thousand cubits, and for the west side two thousand cubits, and for the north side two thousand cubits, the city being in the midst. This shall be to them the open land about the cities.

To these {lezeh} you shall give corners {peot - mentioned earlier in the pasuk}, and you do not give corners to those establishing rest on Shabbat {in terms of techum, etc}. And the Sages hold - zeh - like this do shall be for all who establish rest on Shabbat.

{Eruvin 23b}
It was stated {by Amoraim}:
Rav Yosef cited Rav Yehuda who cited Shmuel: The halacha is like Rabbi Yossi.
And Rav Bibi cited Rav Nachman who cited Shmuel: The halacha is like Rabbi Akiva.
And both intend leniency, and both are needed. For if I only let it be heard that the halacha is like Rabbi Yossi, I would have believed that this is only provided there is a watchman's hut or a dwelling place {like Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava}. Therefore he informs us that the halacha is like Rabbi Akiva {that the aforementioned need not be present}.

Rif Eruvin 6a {Eruvin 18a continues ... 21a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
6a

{Eruvin 18a continues}
Rabbi Yehuda says: {There is an upper limit -} until bet satayim. {The amount which can produce two seah of grain}.
The Sages said to him: {The limit of} a bet satayim was only said regarding a garden or a wood shed {which are not meant to serve as habitations}, but if it was a cattle-pen, a fold, a courtyard, or a backyard, even as much as 5 bet kor is permitted. And thus it is permitted to distance {the strips} any amount {from the well} provided you increase the number of strips.

{Eruvin 20b}
Gemara:
Rabbi Yitzchak bar Adda said: These strips around wells were only permitted to pilgrims to the festivals {olei regalim}.
But we learnt {in a brayta}: Strips around wells were only permitted to animals.
What animals? Animals of the pilgrims of the festival, but a human must climb up and climb down {the well}.

{Eruvin 22a}
Mishna:
Rabbi Yehuda says: If a public road cuts through them {=the pasin}, it should {instead} be diverted to one side {for otherwise it will nullify the partitions}.
And the Sages say: This is not required.
{Eruvin 22b}
For a public well, a public cistern {=bor; in a cistern, the water might be dried up}, and a private well, we may make pasin, but for a private cistern, we make it a partition of 10 handbreadths high. These are the words of Rabbi Akiva.
Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava says: We only make pasin for a public well, while for the rest, we make a rope fence {as discussed in the previous perek} ten handbreadths high.

{Eruvin 23a}
Gemara:
Rav Yehuda cited Shmuel: The halacha is like Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava.
And Rav Yehuda cited Shmuel: They only permitted pasin for wells of spring water.
And we need {both statements}. For if we had only heard that the halacha is like Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, I would have believed this meant in terms of being public, even it contained gathered {rain} water, and this that it said a public well, this comes to exclude Rabbi Akiva. Therefore it informs us that pasin of wells were only permitted for wells of spring water. And if we had only heard that the only permitted pasin for wells of spring water, I would have believed that it did not matter whether it was the public's or an individuals. Therefore it informs us that the halacha is like Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava.

{Eruvin 21a}
Rav Yirmiya bar Abba said: The isolated huts {which extend the city limits before the techum begins} and the pasin of wells do not apply in Bavel or in other countries {except Eretz Yisrael}. The law of isolated huts does not apply in Bavel because bursting of dams is common; in other countries it also does not because thieves are common. pasin of wells in Bavel is not applicable because water is common {=in abundance}, and outside of Israel also no because academies {of learning Torah} are not common {and so the travellers are not comparable to olei regalim}.

Rav Chisda said to Mar the son of Rav Huna the son of Rav Yirmiya bar Abba:

Rif Eruvin 5b {Eruvin 17b continues ... 18a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
5b

{Eruvin 17b continues}
BEGIN PEREK II - Osin Pasin

MISHNA:
We make strips {of wood - pasin} for wells - 4 dey-omdin {=corner pieces, such that there are two standing pieces at right angles} that have the appearance of 8. These are the words of Rabbi Yehuda.




Rabbi Meir says: 8 strips that have the appearance of 12: 4 being corner pieces and 4 flat strips.

Their height must be {at least} 10 handbreadths, their width 6 {handbreadths}, and their thickness any size whatsoever.

Between them may be as much space as to admit 2 teams of 3 oxen each. These are the words of Rabbi Meir.
Rabbi Yehuda says: Of 4 oxen each, tied together and not loose from one another {which would be more distant}, {with enough space between the two teams for} one entering while the other exits.

It is permitted to bring the strips {fairly} close to the well, provided that a cow's head and majority of its body will be within {the enclosure} when it drinks.
{Eruvin 18a}
And it is permitted to distance the strips from the well any amount whatsoever, so long as you increase the number of strips.

Rif Eruvin 5a {Eruvin 16b continues ... 17b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
5a

{Eruvin 16b continues}
which is two seah to each one, and they fenced in 7 {rather than 6}, they are permitted, for they only left empty a bet seah {and not 2}. If they only needed 5 and they fenced in 7, even in the 5 {which they need} they are forbidden, for there is a vacant bet satayim which they do not need.

And we ask: But what of this that they learn: But the Sages say: both an individual and a caravan are given all that they need, so long as there is not a bet satayim vacant.
Does this not mean vacant of a man - and {here} since they are three, and each one of them gets a bet satayim, behold they have 6 seah, and there is only vacant of a man {to claim it} a single seah! And if so, why do you say that they are forbidden even in the 5?
And we answer, the "vacant" that we learn does not mean vacant of man, but rather vacant of vessels, and since they {=the three} only require for their vessels 5 seah and they fenced in 7, there are 2 {seah} vacant of vessels, and therefore even the 5 are forbidden, for their fence has been nullified.

If they were three and they fenced in an area to grow 6 seah, and acquired shevita {= a resting place for Shabbat, that they would dwell there - this when Shabbat came in}, and afterwards, one of them died, they are permitted {to use the area} just as initially, and we are not concerned that this one has died {leaving 2 seah "vacant"}.
And if 2 acquired shevita {when Shabbat came in, in an area to grow 6 seah} and afterwards one was added to them, they are forbidden just as initially, and even though there was added to them.
What is the reason? {The onset of} Shabbat causes, and not the {present number of} dwellers.

{The Mishna had said:} "And the Sages say: One of the two {=warp or woof}":
The opinion of the Sages is identical with that of the Tanna Kamma!
This is the difference between them - an individual in a settled area {rather than the wilderness}. For the latter Sages {as opposed to the Tanna Kamma at the beginning of the Mishna} hold that an individual in a settled area is permitted to carry within partitions of warp or woof, just as is the law in the wilderness - and the halacha is like them.

{Erubin 17b}
{The Mishna said:} "And they are exempt from washing their hands":
Abaye said: They only learnt this regarding the mayim rishonim {=first waters = washing before the meal}, but mayim acharonim {=washing after the meal} is an obligation.
For Rav Yehuda said: Why did they say that mayim acharonim is an obligation? Because of Sodomite salt which blinds the eye.
Abaye said: A kortov {grain} of such salt is found in a kor {of salt}.

Rav Acha the son of Rava said to Rav Ashi: What if he was measuring out salt {rather than eating}.
He said to him: You don't need {to ask}.
That is to say, you need to wash your hands {afterwards}. {Note that this is an interpretation. One could have understood that you don't need to wash.}

{The Mishna said:} "and {exempt} from having to make an eruv":
They said in the academy of Rabbi Yannai: They only said this regarding the eruv of courtyards {to allow carrying}, but the eruv of techum {to establish a Shabbat center} they are obligated, for Rabbi Chiyya taught {in his brayta}: we administer lashes for eruv of techum as a Biblical matter.
This was problematic to Rabbi Yochanan: And do they truly administer lashes for a prohibition which was given over to warning of death penalty by bet din? {Rather, death!}
Rav Ashi said {answered}: Does it state אל יוציא איש - let no man carry out? It is written {Shemot 15:29} אל יצא איש - let no man go out!
That is to say, this verse is speaking about going out only with legs, and there is no death penalty from the bet din, but just a warning, and therefore, we administer lashes for it.

And it is problematic for us how we say that we administer lashes for eruv of techum as a Biblical matter, for we establish that we do not rule like Rabbi Akiva who said that techum was a Biblical matter.

And we find in the Yerushalmi, that we learn there:
{... As Rav Hoshaya said:} The extent of techum Shabbat is not straightforward to you as a Biblical matter {and thus, we are understanding this gemara to say, it is of Rabbinic origin}.
Rabbi Mana asked: This is fine to say regarding the 2000 cubits, that it is not straightforward. But 4000 cubits is straightforward!
Rabbi Shmuel bar Bisna {our gemara: bar Sisreta} cited Rabbi Acha: None is more straightforward than the techum of 12 mil, which is the size of the encampment of Israel.

We thus find now that techum Shabbat, some of them are Rabbinic and some Biblical. From 2000 cubits and higher until 12 mil, we administer lashes for them Rabbinically, and according to Rabbi Akiva, we administer lashes for them Biblically, for it is written {Bemidbar 35:4-5}:

ד וּמִגְרְשֵׁי, הֶעָרִים, אֲשֶׁר תִּתְּנוּ, לַלְוִיִּם--מִקִּיר הָעִיר וָחוּצָה, אֶלֶף אַמָּה סָבִיב.

4 And the open land about the cities, which ye shall give unto the Levites, shall be from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about.

ה וּמַדֹּתֶם מִחוּץ לָעִיר, אֶת-פְּאַת-קֵדְמָה אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֶת-פְּאַת-נֶגֶב אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֶת-פְּאַת-יָם אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְאֵת פְּאַת צָפוֹן אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה--וְהָעִיר בַּתָּוֶךְ; זֶה יִהְיֶה לָהֶם, מִגְרְשֵׁי הֶעָרִים.

5 And ye shall measure without the city for the east side two thousand cubits, and for the south side two thousand cubits, and for the west side two thousand cubits, and for the north side two thousand cubits, the city being in the midst. This shall be to them the open land about the cities.

It is impossible to say 2000 cubits for it has already stated 1000 cubits. But rather, the 1000 cubits are the migrash {open land} and the 2000 cubits are the techum of Shabbat.

And the Sages hold that the 1000 cubits are migrash and the 2000 cubits are fields and vinyards.

From 12 mil and higher, we administer lashes for them Biblically, according to all, for it is written {Shemot 15:29} אל יצא איש - let no man go out - and this is 12 mil corresponding to the encampment of Israel.

But from 2000 cubits and less, it is permitted according to everyone.

And the question still stands in its place, for we only make eruvei techumin until 2000 cubits, and if he places his eruv outside of 2000 cubits, his eruv is no eruv, and it forbidden for him to go further than 2000 cubits {in that direction} even a single cubit, and if this prohibition is Rabbinic, he should not get lashes for it as a Biblical matter, except according to Rabbi Akiva. And this answer does not come out according to our own {Bavli} gemara, and the question stayed in in place until now, and it stands as it stood.

END PEREK ONE
sliku lehu mavuy

Rif Eruvin 4b {Eruvin 15a continues ... 16b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
4b

{Eruvin 15a continues}
{If the breach exactly equalled the standing:}
Rav Papa said: It is permitted.
Rav Huna the son of of Rav Yehoshua said: It is forbidden.
Rav Papa said: So did the All-Merciful teach Moshe: You should not have a majority breach.
Rav Huna the son of of Rav Yehoshua said: So did the All-Merciful teach Moshe: Fence the majority.

{Eruvin 16b}
And the halacha is like Rav Papa, for the Mishna may be analyzed in his way - "provided that the breaches are not more than the built-up portion" - implying that if they are equal, it is permitted.

Mishna:
A fence may also be constructed with three ropes, one above the other; providing the space between each rope be less than three handbreadths, and the measure {=thickness} of the three ropes together exceed one handbreadth, so that the entire {fence} attain {the height of} ten handbreadths.
A fence may also be made of {vertical} canes, providing the space between the canes be less than three handbreadths.

All these regulations apply to a caravan only - these are the words of Rabbi Yehuda.
And the Sages say: They did not speak {only} of a caravan, but they only spoke of a caravan {in the previous Mishna} because that is the common case.

Any partition not constructed warp and woof {that is, of both vertical and horizontal lines} is no partition - these are the words of Rabbi Yossi beRabbi Yehuda.
And the Sages say: any one of the two. {either horizontal or vertical strips}

{Eruvin 17a}
And four things were exempted to {warriors in} a camp: They may bring wood from any place {without respecting the rights of ownership}, and from washing their hands {before eating}, and from demai {food of which it is uncertain that maaser has been taken of it}, and from having to construct an eruv.

{Eruvin 16b}
Gemara:
Rav Nachman lectured in the name of our Rabbenu Shmuel: A courtyard which is used for its empty space {Rashi: for the purpose of that which is outside it - e.g. the watchman stays there to watch what is in the field} and is not fenced in warp and woof, but rather warp and not woof, or woof and not warp - to an individual, we give him bet satayim {an area in which one can grow 2 seah of grain} which is 100 cubits by 50 cubits - Since a bet seah is 50 by 50 cubits, a bet satayim is 100 X 50, which is 70 cubits and change X 70 cubits and change, like the courtyard of the Mishkan, as it is written {Shemot 27:18}:

יח אֹרֶךְ הֶחָצֵר מֵאָה בָאַמָּה וְרֹחַב חֲמִשִּׁים בַּחֲמִשִּׁים, וְקֹמָה חָמֵשׁ אַמּוֹת--שֵׁשׁ מָשְׁזָר; וְאַדְנֵיהֶם, נְחֹשֶׁת.

18 The length of the court shall be a hundred cubits, and the breadth fifty every where, and the height five cubits, of fine twined linen, and their sockets of brass.

and it is called a courtyard, and it was constructed of posts upon which were curtains in the manner of travellers of the deserts, and all matters of Shabbat we learn from the Mishkan, and therefore, an individual we grant a bet satayim, [two, we grant them bet satayim], three is made into a caravan and we give them all they require, and even though it is warp without woof, and so is the halacha.

Rav Gidal cited Rav: Three are permitted in seven and forbidden in five, and Rav Ashi explained this as follows: If they {the three} required six, that is, a bet 6 seah {3 people X 2 seah each = 6 seah}

Rif Eruvin 4a {Eruvin 14a continues ... 15a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
4a

{Eruvin 14a continues}
and its curve is lower than 10 {handbreadths} - we see - if its curve {jutting out of the acceptable parameters} were taken away and there is not between this and that {remaining portion of the korah} 3 {handbreadths} he need not bring another korah, and if not, he needs to bring another korah.

{Eruvin 14b}
Mishna:
The lechis {=sideposts} of which they spoke, their height is 10 handbreadths, and their width and depth is any amount.
Rabbi Yossi says: Their width is 3 handbreadths.

{Eruvin 15a}
With anything we make lechis, even with a living creature.
And Rabbi Meir forbids.

And it renders ritually impure as a golel {=enclosure of a grave}.
And Rabbi Meir declares it pure.

And we may write upon it the bills of divorce for women.
And Rabbi Yossi invalidates.

{Eruvin 14b}
Gemara:
{The Mishna said:} "and their width and depth is any amount {kol shehu}":
And how much is a kol shehu?
Rabbi Chiyya taught {a brayta}: like a chut hasarbal {=the string used to tighten the collar of a cloak}.

They learnt {tana}: If he made a lechi for half an alleyway, he has that half alleyway.

To explain: If he comes to the inner half of the alleyway and makes a lechi there, and leaves the outer half with no lechi, he may make use of that inner half, from the lechi inwards, but from the lechi outwards he is forbidden to make use of it, for it is reckoned as its own alleyway.

Rava said: If he made a lechi for an alleyway and raised it 3 handbreadths from the ground, or distanced it from the wall 3, he accomplished nothing, and even according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel who would say lavud in this case {since his lavud is up to 4 handbreadths}, this is so above, but below, since it is a partition that the young goats can enter, no.

{In the Mishna:} "Rabbi Yossi says: Their width is 3 handbreadths":
Rav Yehuda cited Shmuel: The halacha is not like Rabbi Yossi, not in terms of hilmi {brine, in terms of laws of Shabbat - see Mishna and gemara cited in the Rif here} and not in terms of lechi.
Rav Huna bar Chinena said to him: By hilmi you have said to us, but about lechi you have not said to us.

Rav Rechumi learned {the exchange} as follows:
Rav Yehuda the son of Rav Shmuel bar Shelat cited Rav: The halacha is not like Rabbi Yossi, not in terms of hilmi and not in terms of lechi.
They said to him: Do you say this {confidently}?
He said to them: No.

Rava said: By the Lord! He said this {of a certainty}, and we accepted it from him.
And for what cause did he {Rav Yehuda} retract? Because Rabbi Yossi {always} had a good reason with him {for his statements}.

Rava bar Rav Chanin said to Abaye: What is the halacha.
He said to him: Go out and see what the people do.
That is to say, they practice like the Sages and not like Rabbi Yossi.

{Eruvin 15a}
It was stated {by Amoraim}:
A lechi which stands of its own accord:
Abaye said: it is a {valid} lechi.
And Rava said: it is not a lechi.

When it was not relied upon {that it would serve as a lechi} from yesterday {=before Shabbat}, all agree that it is not a lechi. When do they disagree? When they relied upon it from yesterday {even though it was not erected for this purpose}. Abaye said that it is a lechi, since they relied upon it from yesterday, and Rava said that it is not a lechi, for although they relied upon it from yesterday, since it was not constructed for this purpose it is not a lechi.

And the halacha is like Abaye in יע"ל קג"ם, and this is one of them. {And so it is a valid lechi.}

And they only argued about a lechi, but a partition which came about on its own, all agree that it is a {valid} partition.

Mishna:
If a caravan encamp in a valley and a fence be made around the camp out of the cattle's gear, it is permitted to carry things inside of the fence, providing the fence be ten handbreadths high and the breaches therein do not exceed in extent the fence proper.
And any breach which is 10 cubits {or less wide} is permitted for it is like an entrance; More than that is forbidden.

Gemara:
It was stated {by Amoraim}:
If the breach is exactly equal to the standing

Rif Eruvin 3b {Eruvin 12b continues ... 14a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
3b

{Eruvin 12b continues}
One {an alleyway} whose length exceeds its width, and houses and courtyards enter it. And what is considered a courtyard, such that it is not permitted via a lechi or korah but rather with a strip of 4 {handbreadths on the side of the breach}? One whose length does not exceed its width. But if its length exceeds its width even by the slightest amount, it is reckoned to be an alleyway, and an alleyway suffices with a lechi or a korah.

{Eruvin 13b}
Mishna:
The korah in question must be wide enough to hold an {a half sized brick, and an ariach is half the width of a brick which is three handbreadths. {Thus, the ariach is 1.5 handbreadths wide.}
It is {therefore} sufficient for the korah to be a handbreadth wide, in order to support the width of an ariach. {1/4 handbreadth could stick out on each side.}
It {the korah} must be wide enough to support an ariach and strong enough to support an ariach.
Rabbi Yehuda says: It need be sufficiently wide even though it need not be strong {enough to support an ariach}.
If it {the korah} was made of straw or reed, we consider it as if it were made of metal.
If crooked, we consider it as if it were straight.
Rounded, we consider it as if it were square - if there is in its circumference 3 handbreadths, it had 1 handbreadth in width.

{Eruvin 14a}
Gemara:
Rabba bar Rav Huna said: The korah of which they spoke needs to be strong enough to support the ariach, but the supports of the korah need not be strong enough to support both the korah and an ariach.
And Rav Chisda said: Both this and that - it needs to be strong enough to support a korah and the ariach.

The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: A korah which comes out from {on top} of one wall but does not reach the other wall; and also, two korot, one coming out from this wall and the other from the other wall, and they do not reach each other, if {the gap between korot or between korah and wall is} less than 3 {handbreadths}, he need not bring another korah. If 3 {handbreadths} he needs to bring another korah. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Less than 4 {handbreadths}, he need not bring another korah. If 4 {handbreadths} he needs to bring another korah. And so too, two parallel korot {next to one another, at the same height}, this one cannot support {in width} an ariach, and that one cannot support an ariach, if they can {together} support an ariach to its width of a handbreadth, he need not bring another korah. And if not, he needs to bring another korah. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: if they can support an ariach to its length of 3 handbreadths he need not bring another korah, and if not he needs to bring another korah.

If one {korah} was below and another was above {thus, they were not at the same height} - Rabbi Yossi beRabbi Yehuda says: we view the upper one as if it were below {at the level of the lower one}, assuming that the uppoer one is not above 20 cubits and the lower one is not lower than 10 handbreadths.

{From the Mishna:} "Rabbi Yehuda says: It need be sufficiently wide even though it need not be strong {enough to support an ariach}":
And we do not hold like Rabbi Yehuda, for we need it to be sufficiently wide and strong.
And also, this of Rabbi Yossi beRabbi Yehuda, that we view the upper one as if it were below, we do not hold.

{And from the Mishna:} "If it {the korah} was made of straw or reed {we consider it as if it were made of metal}" is Rabbi Yehuda, and the halacha is not like him.

Rabbi Zera said: If it {the korah} is within the alleyway, and its bend {for the korah curves} is outside the alleyway; if it is within 20 {cubits}, and its bend it above 20; if it is higher than 10 {handbreadths}

Rif Eruvin 3a {Eruvin 11b continues ... 12b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
3a

{Eruvin 11b continues}
Do they {the boards on the side and the board on top} need to touch or do they not need to touch?
To explain, these boards which are on the sides of the alleyway, if they are 10 handbreadths high and to not reach the korah on top, what?
Rav Nachman said: They do not need to touch.
And Rav Sheshet said: They do need to touch.

And the halacha is like Rav Nachman for there is a brayta like him. What is this? That they learnt {in a brayta}: a kippa {a rounded arch}- Rabbi Meir obligates it in mezuza and the Sages exempt it. And they are alike in the case where there is in its feet {a vertical part of the arch} ten handbreadths, that it is obligated.

Thus, it is clear that when there is 10 {handbreadths} in its feet, even though the ceiling at the top part of the arch does not touch the feet, it is an entrance, and is obligated in mezuza. So too here, since there is ten {handbreadths} in the side boards, even though they do not reach {/touch} the ceiling, it is an entrance.

MISHNA:
To legalize {the carrying within} an alleyway:
Bet Shammai hold {that you need} both a lechi and a korah.
And Bet Hillel hold either lechi or a korah.
Rabbi Eliezer said: Two lechis.

In the name of Rabbi Shimon {our gemara: Rabbu Yishmael} a disciple stated before Rabbi Akiva: Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel do not argue regarding an alleyway which is less than 4 cubits that it may be permitted via a lechi or a korah. Regarding what do they argue? Regarding that which is from 4 cubits until 10 - that Bet Shammai say a lechi and a korah, and Bet Hillel say a lechi or a korah.

Rabbi Akiva said: On this and that they argued.

Gemara:
Like whom {was the Mishna}? It is not like Chanania {who recorded a different dispute between Bet Shammai and Bet Hilllel} and not the Tanna Kamma {who said tzurat hapetach on one side and a lechi and korah on the other}.
Rav Yehuda said: This is what it means to say: To legalize {the carrying within} a closed alleyway, howso? Bet Shammai say a lechi and a korah, etc., and the dispute between Chanania and the Tanna Kamma is in regard to an open alleyway.

Rabbi Assi cited Rabbi Yochanan: A courtyard {which is breached to a place forbidden to it} requires two strips from two sides, each strip any width at all, and if only from a single side, you need the strip to be four handbreadths.

{To explain: if a courtyard which is breached in the entirety of one wall {=bemilu`o} to a place which is forbidden to it, say a public domain, it is forbidden to carry in that courtyard. However, if some of the breached wall remains standing, and there are less than ten cubits of breach, then one can treat this missing wall as an entrance, even without placing a korah on top. How so? If there is a strip of wall standing to the left and the right of the breach (or one erects strips there}, even of any width whatsoever, it is reckoned an entrance and it permitted to carry in the courtyard. If there is only a a portion of the breached wall remains standing on the left or the right side, then this strip must be some significant length = 4 handbreadths.}

The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: If the arm of the sea protruded into a courtyard, they may not draw from there on Shabbat unless they made a partition 10 handbreadths high.
With regard to what are these words said? Where the breach was greater than 10 cubits {wide} but 10 {or less} he needs nothing.
"Drawing" is what he may not do, implying that he may carry {his own items in the courtyard}! But is the courtyard not breached to an area forbidden to it? With what are we dealing with?
{Eruvin 12b} Where there are banks {on the side of the arm of the sea, such that it is not breached in its entirety}, which are like strips {pasim}, and these strips which are on the two sides and higher than the sea make carrying permissible in the courtyard, but a partition needs be made within the water to allow taking and drawing the water from it.

Rav Yehuda cited Rav: An alleyway whose length equals its width is not permitted by a lechi of minimal measure.
Rav Chiyya bar Ashi cited Rav: An alleyway whose length equals its width is not permitted by a korah a handbreadth thick.
Rabbi Zera said: How well the words of the elders agree! Since the length is as the width, it is reckoned a courtyard {rather than an alleyway} and a courtyard is not permitted via a lechi or korah but rather with a strip of 4 handbreadths {if on only one side of the breach, or any measure at all if on two sides of the breach}.

Rav Nachman said: We have a tradition: What is an alleyway that is permitted via a lechi or korah?

Rif Eruvin 2b {Eruvin 8b continues ... 11b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
2b

{Eruvin 8b continues}
all would say that he only places it {horizontally} opposite the short one.

And the halacha is that it is permitted to utilize the space underneath the korah of the alleyway, and between the lechis it is also permitted, like Rava.

And these words are so when it {alleyway} opens into the public domain, but if it enters into a karmelit, no. {Eruvin 9a} For Rav Chanin bar Abba cited Rava: Within the entranceway, he needs another lechi {placed past it} to permit it, whether there is four {handbreadths in this area, a significant space} or there is not four {handbreadths}. And we establish this statement as where it opens to a karmelit, for the species finds its kind and awakens it.

{Eruvin 8b}
And where he sticks two pegs into the walls of the alleyway and places the korah upon them, it does not help at all, for we need a korah on the top of the alleyway, which we lack here.

{Eruvin 9b}
It was stated {by Amoraim}:
If it is visible from within and equal {in thickness and thus not visible} from the outside {of the alleyway = a}, it is judged to be a lechi.
If it is visible from the outside and equal from the inside {=b}, Rabbi Chiyya and Rabbi Shimon beRabbi. One said it is judged to be a lechi and one said it is not judges to be a lechi.

And the halacha is that it is judged to be a lechi.

{Eruvin 10b}
An alleyway which is 20 cubits wide: Abaye said: He makes a strip {pas} 10 handbreadths high and 4 cubits long and erects it across the length of the alleyway in the middle.
{Thus, for 4 cubits, the minimum length of an alleyway, he has now two alleyways at the entrance. The entrance of each into the public domain is not more than 10 cubits wide, and so one may fix the situation by means of a korah or lechi.}

Alternatively, he can do as Rav Yehuda, who said that an alleyway which is 15 cubits wide, he distances {=allows empty space from the wall of} 2 cubits and makes a strip {pas} of 3 cubits {wide=across the entranceway}.
{Now, past the strip is an entranceway of exactly 10 cubits, which poses no problem. The 2:3 seems an omed merubeh issue.}
And where it is 20 cubits wide, he does the aforementioned on this side and that side.
And let us fear lest they abandon the great entrance {of 10 cubits} and enter via the small entrance {of 2 cubits, thus nullifying the fix}?
Rav Yehuda bar Matna said: There is an assumption {chazaka} than a man will not set aside the larger entrance, and enter and leave via the smaller entrance.

{The Mishna had stated:} "But if it have the appearance of a door {tzurat hapetach}, even though it be wider than ten cubits, it need not be made smaller":
{Eruvin 11b}
Rav Chisda said: A tzurat hapetach which is made from the side, he did not accomplish anything.
Rabenu Hai Gaon explains: such that he made it on the side of the wall, such that it is an entrance on a corner {keren zavit}, {Eruvin 10a} and people do not make entrances at corners.

{Eruvin 11b}
And Rav Chisda said: The tzurat hapetach of which they spoke needs to be strong enough to support a door, even if it be a door of straw.

They learnt {tana}: The tzurat hapetach of which they spoke is a board on this side, and board on that side, and a board atop them.

Rif Eruvin 2a {Eruvin 6a continues ... 8b}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
2a

{Eruvin 6a continues}
The Sages learnt {in a brayta}:

How do we create an eruv for alleyways which are open on both sides to the public domain?

{The Tanna Kamma:} We make a tzurat hapetach {=the form of a door, = two posts and a korah atop} on one end {thus transforming it into a "closed" alleyway, open only on one side} and a lechi or korah on the other end.

Chanania says: Bet Shammai say we make a door on one side and a door on the other side, and when he exits or enters, he shuts it. And Bet Hillel say we make a door on one side and a lechi or korah on the other side.

{Eruvin 6b}
It was stated {by Amoraim}:
Rav said: the halacha is like the Tanna Kamma.
And Shmuel said: the halacha is like Chanania, according to Bet Hillel.

And the halacha is like Rav in both of them, as regards the crooked alleyway in what he said that its law was as an open alleyway, and as regards open alleyways in that he holds that the halacha is like the Tanna Kamma. For we establish that the halacha is like Rav in regard to prohibitions.

And these words are that as alleyways which open specifically to the public domain, a tzurat hapetach suffices on one side and a lechi or korah on the other side. But the public domain itself, we cannot make an eruv except via doors on this side and that, and this only where they are shut at night, for Rabba bar bar Channa cited Rabbi Yochanan: Yerushalayim, if not for its doors being shut at night, we would be liable for it as a public domain.

And that crooked alleyway which was in Nehardea, and they cast upon it the stringencies of Rav and Shmuel and required doors, this is no difficulty, for Nehardea was the place of Shmuel.

{Eruvin 7b}
Rav said: An alleyway which is breached in its fullness to a courtyard, and the courtyard is breached opposite it to the public domain, the courtyard is permitted and the alleyway is forbidden.

{Eruvin 8a}
The courtyard is permitted, even though the public intrudes upon it, for we learnt in a brayta: A courtyard that the public enters here and leaves there is a private domain as regards Shabbat and a public domain as regards ritual impurity.

And the alleyway is forbidden, for it is an alleyway which is "open" to the public domain.

{Eruvin 8b}
It was stated {by Amoraim}:
An alleyway constructed in the shape of a nadal {=centipede}: To explain nadal, it is an insect which has many feet to each side, and it is "open" {to the public domain}.

{To explain the image, each line represents an alleyway. The alleyway is open to the public domain at each spot marked by an X.}

Abaye said: He makes a tzurat hapetach for the large one {on one side of the horizontal line} and all the rest will be permitted by means of a lechi or a korah.

{Abaye holds here like Shmuel that a crooked alleyway it has the status of a closed alleyway. By placing a tzurat hapetach on one side and a korah on the other, the horizontal alleyway is covered. The other alleyways are all closed by means of the crookedness, such that each only needs either a lechi or korah.}

Rava said to him: Like whom? Like Shmuel who said that it {the crooked alleyway} is judged like a closed alleyway?! But there was a crooked alleyway in Nehardea and they took into consideration Rav's opinion!
{And so here, one could trace a line from the korah at the end of each vertical alleyway to the korah at the one end of the horizontal, or even to the korah at the end of another vertical!}
Rather, Rava said: he makes a tzurat hapetach for each of them on one side, and the other side may be permitted via a lechi or korah.
{Since there is only one lechi or korah in the entire production, one cannot trace a line from the korah towards another korah, but will always hit a tzurat hapetach on the other side.}

From this we derive that the halacha is like Rav who said that the halacha is like the Tanna Kamma {in making an eruv for an open alleyway}, for Rava holds like Rav, and we have established that in every dispute between Abaye and Rava, the halacha is like Rava except for יע"ל קג"ם.

It was stated in the name of Rav Kahana the Great: An alleyway whose one side is long and the other side is short: If {the difference between them is} less than 4 cubits, he places the korah at the diagonal; 4 cubits, he only places the korah {horizontally across the alleyway} by the short wall.

To explain, if the long one is more than the short one by 4 cubits, it is reckoned an alleyway unto itself and needs a partition {wall} opposite it, and if the long one is more than the short one by less than 4 cubits, it is not like its own alleyway, and therefore he places the korah upon it diagonally.

Rava said: In both cases, he only places the korah {horizontally} next to the short one.
What is the reason? The korah is because of heker {to let people know the transition of Shabbat domain} and diagonally, it is not a heker.

And if there is in {the length of} the diagonal more than 10 cubits,

Rif Eruvin 1b {Eruvin 5a continues ... 6a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
1b

{Eruvin 5a continues}
It was stated in Rav Ami and Rav Asi's name: if there is a post {pas} of 4 {Chavot Yair adds: handbreads}, it permits a gap up to ten {cubits}. And if not {=there is no pas}, then {a gap of} less than 3 handbreadths is permitted {for we may employ lavud to bridge to gap}, 3 handbreads {+} is not permitted.

And we establish this of Rav Ami and Rav Asi as referring to a case when there is a boundary - that is, in the place of the breach, there is still a boundary {from the stubble of the walls} like an enclosure holds back the members of the public domain {from easily entering}.

Rami bar Abba cited Rav Huna: A lechi {= a vertical post erected at the entrance to an alleyway. it is an alternative to the horizontal korah} which juts our from the wall of the alleyway less than four cubits is reckoned a lechi and does not need another lechi to come and permit it. {If it juts out} four cubits, it is reckoned an alleyway and needs another lechi in order to permit it.

As regards the {preceding} segment, I have seen two explanations which were not exact, for there are refutations to them, and therefore I have not written them {here}. And here is the {true} explanation:

A lechi which juts out of the wall of the alleyway such that there is {now} a fourth wall extending across the width of the alleyway, then if it only extends less than 4 cubits it is judged to be a lechi since it is not the {minimum} length of an alleyway {that is, 4 cubits}. Therefore the alleyway does not require another lechi to permit it. And if there is in it {the lechi} the {minimum} measure of an alleyway {=4 cubits}, it is not judged to be a lechi but rather as the other walls of the alleyway, and the entrance to the alleyway thus remains without a lechi, and therefore requires a lechi to permit it. And that {additional} lechi, we may place it on the opposite side, or else he may place it next to the first one {lechi}
and {if he places it next to the first lechi} add a bit {to the new lechi} over the thickness of the first one, or reduce a bit from the thickness of the first one, such that it is a heker {so people recognize it as different than the wall and it reminds them of the boundary into a new domain}.

{Eruvin 5b}
Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua said: They only said this as regards an alleyway whose width was eight cubits, such that on this fourth wall {= the open end of the alleyway marked by the long, 4 cubit lechi}, the breach in it is equal to the standing {wall} in it. For {then,} the standing is 4 {cubits} and the breach is 4 {cubits}. But by an alleyway whose width in 7 cubits, since the standing is 4 cubits and the breach is 3 {cubits}, it is permitted by the fact that the standing portion is greater than the breach {omed merubeh al haparutz, and this may be learned} via a kal vachomer from a courtyard. A courtyard which is not permitted via a lechi or a korah but rather only with strip of four {handbreadths = pas daled} is permitted via the standing portion being greater than the breach, and does not need a strip {pas}, then surely an alleyway which is permitted via a lechi or a korah should permitted via the standing portion being greater than the breach, and would not need a lechi.

And Rav Ashi came and said that even as regards an alleyway of width 8 {cubits exactly} you do not need a {new} lechi {if your first lechi was 4 cubits across}. For what have you? {Firstly, it is not clear than these measures are exact, to the level of the atom.} If the standing portion is slightly more {than 4 cubits, i.e. the lechi = standing portion is 4.00001 cubits, and the breach is 3.99999 cubits}, then it is permitted because the standing is greater than the breach. And if the breach is slightly more {than 4 cubits, i.e. the breach is 4.00001 cubits, and the lechi is 3.99999 cubits}, since there is not in the jutting out portion {=the lechi} a length of 4 {cubits}, it is judged to be a lechi {and not just a wall}. What will you say? That they are exactly equal {, both 4.0 cubits}? This is a case of doubt in a Rabbinic matter {for the need for a lechi is Rabbinic}, and in a Rabbinic doubt we rule leniently.

And the halacha is like Rav Ashi. This is the interpretation of this segment - it is a clear and insightful explanation, and there is not in it any difficulty or doubt.

It was stated: A twisted alleyway {aqum - where each alleyway entrance leads to the public domain}:
Rav said: Its law is like that of an open alleyway. {i.e. a straight alleyway whose two entrances lead to the public domain}
And Shmuel said: Its law is like that of a closed alleyway {i.e. a straight alleyway with only one entrance leading to the public domain}, and it is permitted via a lechi or a korah {at the end leading to the public domain.}

{The same is true at each leg of the crooked alley that it needs a lechi or korah, Shmuel is only addressing one leg of this crooked alleyway, which may be permitted via a lechi or korah at the entrance to the public domain, without any regard whatsoever as to what is done with the second leg, for the right angle separates these two "closed" alleyways.}