יט איתיביה רב אדא בר מתנה לרבא היתה קורתו
19 holds that its inner edge [is deemed to] descend and close up [the entrance]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The space under the beam, being in consequence outside the alley, must be regarded as belonging to the public domain and its use must, therefore, be forbidden.');"><sup>39</sup></span> while the other Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. each of the group.');"><sup>34</sup></span> maintains that it is its outer edge [that is deemed to] descend and close it up.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. previous note mutatis mutandis. ohhjk');"><sup>40</sup></span> R'Hisda stated: All agree that [the use of the space] between side-posts is forbidden.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where no cross-beam but only a side-post had been put up. The plural () in the text applies to alleys in general, each single alley requiring no more than one side-post at its entrance (V. Rashi) .');"><sup>41</sup></span> Rami B'Mama enquired of R'Hisda: What is the ruling where one Inserted two pins [respectively] in the two [extremities of the] walls of an alley on the outside<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. in the thicknesses of the walls, on either side of the entrance, that face the public domain.');"><sup>42</sup></span> and placed a beam on them?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that the inner edge of the beam touches the walls of the alley while the rest of the beam lies outside. Is the alley, it is asked, rendered ritually fit for the Sabbath by such an arrangement?');"><sup>43</sup></span> The other replied: According to him who permits [elsewhere the use of the space under the cross-beam the use of the space here] is forbidden;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the very reason for the permission to use the space under the beam, viz., that the outer edge of the beam is deemed to descend to the ground, is a reason here for the prohibition of the use of the entire interior of the alley. For if the outer edge is the limit of the partition, the thickness of the beam separates it from the alley and so invalidates it as a partition of it.');"><sup>44</sup></span> and according to him who forbids [the use elsewhere of such space,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because he maintains that it is the inner edge of the beam that constitutes the partition.');"><sup>45</sup></span> the use of it here] is permitted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the inner edge does touch the walls of the alley and so forms a valid partition between the public domain and the alley. h" ,');"=""><sup>46</sup></span> Raba said: According to him also who forbids [the use of the space under the cross-beam the use of the alley here] is forbidden, since we require the beam to rest above the alley and this is not the case here. R'Adda B'Mattena raised an objection against Raba:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And also against R. Hisda () .');"><sup>47</sup></span> If its<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the moving of objects within the courtyard is permitted.');"><sup>8</sup></span> cross-beam