Commentary for Eruvin 9:4

ואיבעית אימא דכולי עלמא אמרינן היכר של מטה כהיכר של מעלה והכא בגזירה שמא יפחות קמיפלגי:

And if you prefer I might reply that all agree that a distinguishing mark below [is provided by the same width] as the one above,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Only one handbreadth.');">¹²</span> but their<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Abaye's and R. Joseph's.');">¹³</span> point of difference here is [the question whether a wider space was ordered] as a preventive measure against the possibility of its being trodden down.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he or it will diminish', sc. the raised ground, if it were to be allowed to consist of the minimum width of one handbreadth only, might in the course of time be worn down to less than a handbreadth. R. Joseph holds that this possibility was not provided against while Abaye holds that it was. Hence, according to Abaye, the necessity for a width of more than a handbreadth. And since a width above the minimum was required, it was fixed at four handbreadths. (cf. supra p. 23, n. 9 final clause) .');">¹⁴</span> [If an entrance to an alley] was less than ten handbreadths [in height] and it was desired to dig up the ground<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and he engraved in it'.');">¹⁵</span> so as to bring up the altitude<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to complete it'.');">¹⁶</span>

Explore commentary for Eruvin 9:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.