Study Eruvin folio 5A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And the one who said 4 handbreadths holds that the alleyway is considered as if it were sealed from the inside edge of the cross beam, and consequently it is prohibited to utilize the area beneath the cross beam. As the area beneath the cross beam is not part of the alleyway, a significant demarcat
The Talmud rejects this explanation: No, everyone agrees that it is permitted to utilize the area beneath the cross beam, and they disagree with regard to this: This Master, Rav Yosef, holds that a cross beam functions in an alleyway as a conspicuous marker that demarcates the alleyway from the pu
The Talmud proposes an alternative explanation: And if you wish, say instead that everyone agrees that a cross beam serves as a conspicuous marker, and here they disagree with regard to the relationship between a conspicuous marker below, i.e., the raised area of the alleyway, and a conspicuous mar
The Talmud proposes yet another explanation of the amoraic dispute: And if you wish, say instead that everyone agrees that we say that fundamentally, the halakha that governs the conspicuous marker below is like the halakha that applies to the conspicuous marker above, and even a handbreadth should
The Talmud considers a new case: If the cross beam spanning the entrance to an alleyway was less than 10 handbreadths above the ground, and one hollowed out the ground under the cross beam in order to complete the distance from the ground to the cross beam to 10, how much must he hollow out? The Ta