Commentary for Eruvin 188:9

מ"מ קשיא

Furthermore, it may be objected, does Samuel at all uphold the principle that the edge of a ceiling is deemed to descend downwards to close a gap,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That was wider than ten cubits, as has just been explained to be the case according to Samuel, with the breach dealt with in our MISHNAH:');">¹³</span> seeing that it was stated: 'if an exedra was situated in a valley it is, Rab rule permitted to move objects within all its interior, but Samuel ruled: Objects may be moved within four cubits only'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' . Supra 25a, which shows that the principle of the downward extension of a ceiling is not upheld by Samuel.');">¹⁴</span>

Explore commentary for Eruvin 188:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.