Commentary for Eruvin 179:3

ורמי בר חמא אגב חורפיה לא עיין בה אלא הכי קמיבעיא ליה ב' אמות בגג וב' אמות באכסדרה מהו

his ingenuity he was not careful in putting the question. He, however, meant to put the question thus: Is it permitted to move an object<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what (law) is it'.');">¹⁰</span> two cubits along a roof<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of a dwelling-house.');">¹¹</span> and two cubits along an exedra?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the roof of an exedra, that did not belong to the owner of the adjoining roof and house, that was bigger than two beth se'ah, that had no partitions around it, that was in a sloping position and that had in consequence the status of a karmelith,');">¹²</span> Do we say: Since neither the one nor the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. neither the roof of the dwelling-house nor that of the exedra.');">¹³</span>

Explore commentary for Eruvin 179:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.