משנה: מְחִיצַת הַקָּנִים אִם אֵין שָׁם בֵּין קָנֶה לַחֲבֵירוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס הַגְּדִי הֲרֵי זוּ כִמְחִיצָה. וְגֶדֶר שֶׁנִּפְרַץ עַד עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת הֲרֵי הוּא כְפֶתַח. יוֹתֵר מִיכֵּן כְּנֶגֶד הַפִּירְצָה אָסוּר. נִפְרְצוּ בוֹ פִּרְצוֹת הַרְבֶּה אִם הָעוֹמֵד מְרוּבָּה עַל הַפָּרוּץ מוּתָּר וְאִם הַפָּרוּץ מְרוּבָּה עַל הָעוֹמֵד כְּנֶגֶד הַפִּירְצָה אָסוּר. MISHNAH: If there are less than three hand-breadths of distance between the sticks of a partition fence made from sticks, so that a kid goat cannot enter, then that is a valid partition wall46In this case, one may plant the vineyard up to the partition fence and on the other side one may sow his field up to the partition fence. One speaks here of a partition fence rather than a stone wall because one does not plant vines too close to a stone wall since the roots of the vines would damage the foundations of such a wall.. Also, if a wall was torn down up to a length of ten cubits, that acts as a gate. If more than that, it is forbidden along the torn-down part47At such a place, the outside field must be separated from the vines by a minimum of four cubits. The same rule applies to the situation described in the next sentence. [The same rules apply for carrying on the Sabbath; a fenced-in domain is private only if a) the torn-down parts do not exceed 10 cubits at any one place and b) the sum of the lengths of the standing walls overall must be more than the sum of the lengths of the breaches in the wall.]. If it is torn down in many places, if what is standing is more than what is torn down, it is permitted, but if the torn-down part is more than the standing one, it is forbidden at the torn-down places.
הלכה: עֲשָׂרָה פַּסִּין כְּנֶגֶד הַבֵּינַייִן וְיֵשׁ בְּעוֹמֵד אַרְבָּעָה וְהָעוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ כְּנֶגֶד הָעוֹמֵד מוּתָּר כְּנֶגֶד הַפִּרְצָה אָסוּר. עָשָׂה פַסִּין כְּנֶגֶד הַגְּפָנִים וְאֵין בְּעוֹמֵד אַרְבָּעָה וְהַפָּרוּץ רָבָה עַל הָעוֹמֵד. פְּשִׁיטָא כְּנֶגֶד הָעוֹמֵד מוּתָּר כְּנֶגֶד הַפִּירְצָה אָסוּר. HALAKHAH: Ten laths at the in-betweens48Here one speaks of the situation described at the end of the Mishnah, viz., a wall with many breaches. If a standing segment of wall is less than four hand-breadths long, it is not regarded as a partner with the two other standing pieces to its left and right. The laths one discusses here are not put into the torn-down parts but close to them, either before the front or behind the back part of the wall; therefore, they cannot be considered parts of the wall. Hence, one may plant vines up to the wall and sow produce on the other side only where an actual wall provides the separation; everywhere else the minimal distance must be 4 cubits. and what is standing is four hand-breadths wide, and what is standing is more than what is torn down: where it is standing it is permitted, where it is torn down it is forbidden. If one made laths in front of the vines49This shields the vines from being seen through the holes in the wall but the laths are separated from the wall., and what is standing is less than four hand-breadths, and what is torn down is more than what is standing, it is obvious50It is obvious that one is forbidden to sow near the open spaces but it is not obvious at all that one is permitted to sow near the standing wall since both for the Sabbath (Eruvin 1:9, fol. 19c) and for making a Sukkah (Sukkah 1:1, fol. 52a) a piece of wall is disregarded if it is not at least four hand-breadths wide. The statement then also contradicts the assertion of the next paragraph, that the rules of kilaim and Sabbath are identical. One has to assume that, originally, instead of ואין one read ויש. that where it is standing it is permitted, where it is torn down it is forbidden.
רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן חֲנִינָה נָעַץ אַרְבָּעָה קָנִים בְּאַרְבָּעָה זָוִיוֹת שֶׁבְּכֶרֶם וְקָשַׁר גָּמֵי מִלְּמַעֲלָה מַצִּיל מִשּׁוּם פֵּיאָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן כִּמְחִיצַת שַׁבָּת כֵּן מְחִיצַת כִּלְאַיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָלַךְ רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה אֶצֶל רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי לְנגנינר הֶרְאָהוּ שָׂדֶה אַחַת. וּבֵית חֲבֵירָתָה הָֽיְתָה נִקְרֵאת. וְהָיוּ שָׁם פִּרְצוֹת יוֹתֵר מֵעֶשֶׂר וְהָיָה נוֹטֵל אָעִין וְסוֹתֵם. דּוּקַרְנִין וְסוֹתֵם עַד שֶׁמִּיעֵטָן פָּחוֹת מֵעֶשֶׂר. אָמַר כְּזֶה כֵן מְחִיצַת שַׁבָּת. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא מוֹדֶה רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ לְעִנְייַן שַׁבָּת שֶׁאֵין הַפֵּיאָה מַצֶלֶת יוֹתֵר מֵעֶשֶׂר. אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּי מַתְנִיתָא אָֽמְרָה כֵן מַקִּיפִין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֲבָלִים זֶה לְמַעֲלָה מִזֶּה וְזֶה לְמַעֲלָה מִזֶּה. אִם אָמַר אַתְּ שֶׁהַפֵּיאָה מַצֶלֶת יוֹתֵר מֵעֶשֶׂר דַּיּיוֹ חֶבֶל אֶחָד. 53This paragraph and the following ones are found also in Eruvin1:9 (fol. 19c), Sukkah 1:1 (fol. 52a). Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Judah ben Ḥaninah54A Galilean Amora of the first generation.: If one put in four poles at the four corners of a vineyard and connected them with a bast string on top55The rope of bast connects one pole to the other, all around the vineyard. In the Babli (Eruvin 11a/b), the expression is זמורה, “shoot of a vine.” The “string” used here may be a natural product; it does not have to be manufactured., this saves as a symbolic fence56Cf. Chapter 1, Note 159.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the rules of separation walls for the Sabbath are the rules for kilaim57The rules for Sabbath, the definition of walls that enclose a domain to make it private, are discussed in detail in tractate Eruvin, Chapters 1 and 2. In Babli Eruvin11a/b, the statement of R. Simeon ben Laqish in the name of R. Judah ben Ḥaninah explicitly excludes the expedient of the bast rope for the Sabbath, but R. Joḥanan excludes it also for kilaim. R. Simeon ben Laqish is reported there to accept for himself the statement attributed here to R. Joḥanan, that the rules for Sabbath and kilaim are identical, whereas R. Joḥanan rejects this in general. The position of the Babli is that R. Simeon ben Laqish only reports the opinion of R. Judah ben Ḥaninah without accepting it himself, and that R. Joḥanan prohibits the use of a rope for openings wider than 10 cubits. The Yerushalmi accepts R. Simeon ben Laqish’s statement as describing his own position.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it happened that Rebbi Joshua ben Qorḥah went to Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri at Nagnigar58A place in lower Galilee; the name is spelled נגנגד, נגינר and, in the Babli, נגנינר. The report in the Babli is quite different, but the essence is the same, viz., that both for Sabbath and kilaim an opening may not be wider than 10 cubits, in the opinion of R. Joḥanan even with פיאה.; he showed him a field called bet ḥaverata whose wall had parts torn down more than ten59Ten cubits, making the wall invalid as separation. wide. He took wood to insert, forked poles60Greek δίκρανον “pitchfork”. The “woods” were planks put on the ground and connected to the wall; the poles were stuck into the ground. They were forked so that on each side a rope could be attached forming פיאה to the next pole. Cf. Latin furcilla; its use in vineyards is described by Varro I.8. This explanation from Musaphia is accepted by most Semitic linguists. [Symmachus uses δίκρανα to translate כילפות “hatchets” (Ps. 74:6).]
H. L. Fleischer derives the word from Semitic דקר “to pierce”. Arabic دُقْرَان “trellis made for vines” might be an Aramaic loanword (S. Fränkel) or have a common root دقر “to bolt a door with a piece of wood” with دِقْر “bolt, lock”, دَوْقَرَة “arid plain between mountains”, دَقْر “prosperous garden”. to insert, until he reduced to less than ten. He said, just like that is a dividing wall for the Sabbath. Rebbi Zeïra said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish agrees that on the Sabbath, a symbolic fence does not save more than ten61A string strung from one pole to the next creates the impression of a gate and a gate cannot be wider than 10 cubits.. Rebbi Ḥaggai said, the Mishnah says so: “One surrounds it with three ropes, one above the other62Mishnah Eruvin 1:9: If a caravan camps in the desert during the Sabbath, in order to create a space where one is permitted to carry, one puts bags at the corners of the domain and connects them with three parallel rows of ropes so that no two ropes are more than 3 hand-breadths distant from each other. If the diameters of the three ropes add another hand-breadth, the upper rim of this symbolic wall is 10 hand-breadths above ground, one has created a valid separation, and the enclosed space is a private domain. (This speaks against Maimonides’s interpretation of Mishnah 3 in this Chapter.) For kilaim, a wall made in this way by three ropes strung one above the other is accepted in Tosephta Kilaim 4:3..” If you say that the string saves, one rope would be sufficient63The caravan clearly wants more space for animals and people than 10 by 10 cubits; if they park some camel loads at the four corners of their camp, they need a surrounding wall, not a surrounding gate. If it is possible to symbolize a wall with one rope, why does one need three?.
רִבִּי יוֹנָה אָמַר רִבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּה בָּעֵי הָדָא פֵּיאָה מַה אַתְּ אָֽמְרָת מִלְּמַעֲלָן מִן הַצַּד. אִין תֵּימַר מִלְּמַעֲלָן הָא כָּל־שֶׁכֵּן מִן הַצַּד. אִין תֵּימַר מִן הַצַּד הָא מִלְּמַעֲלָן לֹא. אִין תֵּימַר מִלְּמַעֲלָן יְאוּת אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּי אִין תֵּימַר מִן הַצַּד לֹא אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּי כְּלוּם. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ אִם מִלְּמַעֲלָן הֲרֵי מִלְּמַעֲלָן. אִי מִן הַצַּד הֲרֵי מִן הַצַּד. רַבָּנִין דְּקֵיסָרִין בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה תִּיפְתָּר בַּעֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִין דּוּקְרָן. Rebbi Jonah said: Rebbi Hoshaia asked, what do you say about that symbolic fence, on top or at the sides66If four poles are put up at the four sides of the vineyard, does the string have to go from top to top, to create the impression of a gate, or is it strung at half height between the poles, to give the impression of a wall?? If you say on top, so much more on the sides67At least for kilaim, a wall is more of a separation than a gate.. If you say on the sides, then not on the top. If you say on the top, Rebbi Ḥaggai said it correctly68Since the Mishnah in Eruvin does not require the lowest rope to be within three hand-breadths of the ground, it is clear that even if the rows are strung high one needs three ropes and not just one.. If you say from the sides, Rebbi Ḥaggai did not say anything69If the rope must be low, the case of פיאה is different from that of the Mishnah.. What do you want to say70A technical term, indicating that the desired result can be obtained from both hypotheses. The inference here is that R. Ḥaggai is correct in both cases, since the Mishnah is formulated to apply to both of them., if on top, it must be on top. Or from the sides, it is on the sides. The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah: Explain it if they were strung on forked poles71If the poles have separate hooks so that each side has a complete arrangement of poles and rope, then even R. Zeïra will admit that the rope forms a valid enclosure for the Sabbath. In this case, by necessity the rope is on top only. In this, the Yerushalmi parallels the final explanation of the Babli, Eruvin 11b, rejecting symbolic walls but accepting symbolic gates..
רִבִּי זְעִירָא רִבִּי אֶבוּדָמָא דְּחֵיפָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ לְגוֹבַהּ אֲפִילוּ עַד מֵאָה אַמָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן הָדָא דְּאַתְּ אָמַר לְעִנְייַן כִּלְאַיִם אֲבָל לְעִנְייַן שַׁבָּת לֹא תְהֵא פֵיאָה גְדוֹלָה מִן הַקּוֹרָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הִיא כִלְאַיִם הִיא שַׁבָּת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי מַה בֵין קוֹרָה מַה בֵין פֵּיאָה. פֵּיאָה אֵינָהּ מַצֶּלֶת מֵרוּחַ אַחַת. עַד שֶׁתְּהֵא מְגוּפֶפֶת מֵאַרְבַּע רוּחוֹתֶיהָ. קוֹרָה מַצֶּלֶת מֵרוּחַ אַחַת. וְאָתְיָא כְּהַהִיא דָּמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רַב הַמְנוּנָא הַפֵּיאָה אֵינָהּ מַצֶּלֶת עַד שֶׁתְּהֵא מְגוּפֶפֶת מֵאַרְבַּע רוּחוֹתֶיהָ. Rebbi Zeïra, Rebbi Eudaimon of Haifa, in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: In height even one hundred cubits72If a rope is drawn from the top of one pole to the next, there are no height limitations (except, naturally, than it cannot be lower than 10 hand-breadths.). Rebbi Judan said, that is, for kilaim, but as regards the Sabbath, a symbolic fence should not be better than a beam73If the inhabitants of a dead-end street want to turn that dead-end street into a private domain in which one may carry on the Sabbath, they have to put in a visible border either in the form of a beam at the entrance of the dead-end street, going from the wall of one house to the wall of the opposite house, or they may put up a symbolic doorpost. Mishnah Eruvin 1:1 declares that the beam cannot be higher than 20 cubits to be valid.. Rebbi Yose said, it is the same for kilaim and Sabbath. According to Rebbi Yose, what is the difference between a beam and a symbolic fence? A symbolic fence does not save from one side unless it is used to close all four sides; a beam saves in one direction. This may be compared to what Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of Rav Hamnuna: A symbolic fence does not save unless it seals all four sides74The problem is not discussed in the Babli..
אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל טֶיטְרַפֻּלִיּוֹת שֶׁבִּכְּרָמִים אָסוּר לְטַלְטֵל תַּחְתֵּיהֶן. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן סוֹף תִּקְרָה וְאֵין סוֹף תִּקְרָה מַצִּיל מִשּׁוּם פֵּיאָה. אָמַר רִבִּי פִינְחָס אָתָא עוּבְדָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְּאַרְבָּעָה עֲמוּדִין וַעֲלֵיהֶן אַרְבָּעָה פִּיסְטֻלִיּוֹת וְהִתִּיר לְטַלְטֵל תַּחְתֵּיהֶן מִשּׁוּם פֵּיאָה. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, it is forbidden to carry under the fourgated75Greek τετράπυλον, τό, “archway entered from four sides.” Bowers erected at the crossing of two paths, with only the posts and the connecting beams built, and the roof formed by plants climbing on the poles. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal considers these beams as קורה under which one may not carry in a dead-end street. The vineyard in question is not enclosed by a wall, or it is enclosed but too large (larger than 5000 square cubits) to be considered a courtyard for the rules of Sabbath; hence, one may carry under the roof of the bower but not outside. [bowers] in vineyards since they form the end of the roof and the end of a roof cannot save as symbolic fence. Rebbi Phineas said, a case came before Rebbi Jeremiah of four pillars and on them four beams76Greek ἐπιστύλιον, τό “architrave.” (In Eruvin, the spelling is פצטליות with emphatic s.); he permitted to carry under them because of a symbolic fence.77He disagrees with R. Abba bar Mamal.
רִבִּי בּוּן וְרַבָּנִין בָּעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא פֵּיאָה מַהוּ שֶׁתַּצִּיל בְּסוּכָּה. אָמַר לוֹן פֵּיאָה מַצֶּלֶת בְּסוּכָּה. סוֹף סְכָךְ מַהוּ שֶׁיַּצִּיל בְּסוּכָּה. אָמַר לוֹן אֵין סוֹף סְכָךְ מַצִּיל בְּסוּכָּה. מַה בֵּין זֶה לְזֶה. זֶה נַעֲשֶׂה לְכָךְ וְזֶה אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה לְכָךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ כָּל אִילֵּין מִילַּיָּא לְעִנְיַין מַשָּׂא וּמַתָּן הָא לְהוֹרוֹת אָסוּר לְהוֹרוֹת. מַה אִם סוּכָּה קַלָּה אַתְּ אָמַר אָסוּר. שַׁבָּת הַחֲמוּרָה לֹא כָּל־שֶׁכֵּן. Rebbi Abun and the rabbis asked before Rebbi Zeïra, does a symbolic fence save in a sukkah78The hut one must build to live in on the festival of Tabernacles. The main requirement for such a hut is that the roofing must be plant material. The walls can be made of any material. The question is whether a virtual wall is permitted. (The Babli does not consider this problem but states that two full walls and part of a third must be actual walls.)? He said to them, a symbolic fence saves in a sukkah. Does the end of the roofing save in a sukkah79Since the roofing must have some support, the four corner posts of the sukkah must have some connection on which the roofing may rest. Can these connections be considered as peah, following R. Jeremiah in the preceding case?? He said to them, the end of the roofing does not save in a sukkah. What is the difference between them? One is made for the purpose, the other one is not made for the purpose. Rebbi Abbahu said, all these things80The rulings of R. Zeïra. Building a sukkah is a positive commandment but neglecting it is not punishable in court. But desecrating the Sabbath is a capital crime. are for discussion’s sake, but as far as teaching, it is forbidden to teach it. If this is forbidden for the minor commandment of sukkah, so much more for the strict commandment of Sabbath!
רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִייָה בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. מָאן תַּנָּא פֵּיאָה מַצֶּלֶת לֹא רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. אָמַר לֵיהּ אַדְהִי תַּנָּא. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeïra: Is not the Tanna, according to whom a symbolic fence saves, Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri? He said to him, that is the Tanna81Hence, in regard to the Sabbath this is the opinion of a minority of one, which cannot be operational practice..
נִמְצֵאת אָמַר לְעִנְיַין כִּלְאַיִם כָּל־הַפָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה כְסָתוּם. מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה וְעַד אַרְבָּעָה אִם הָעוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ מוּתָּר. וְאִם הַפָּרוּץּ רָבָה עַל הָעוֹמֵד אָסוּר. מֵאַרְבַּע וְעַד עֶשֶׂר אִם עוֹמֵד מְרוּבָּה עַל הַפָּרוּץ מוּתָּר. וְאִם פָּרוּץ מְרוּבָּה עַל הָעוֹמֵד כְּנֶגֶד הָעוֹמֵד מוּתָּר. כְּנֶגֶד הַפָּרוּץ אָסוּר. יוֹתֵר מֵעֶשֶׂר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהָעוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ כְּנֶגֶד הָעוֹמֵד מוּתָּר. כְּנֶגֶד הַפָּרוּץ אָסוּר. לְעִנְייַן שַׁבָּת כָּל־הָפָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה כְסָתוּם. מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה וְעַד אַרְבָּעָה מֵאַרְבָּעָה וְעַד עֶשֶׂר אִם הָעוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ מוּתָּר. וְאִם הַפָּרוּץ רָבָה עַל הָעוֹמֵד אָסוּר. יֶתֶר מֵעֶשֶׂר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ אָסוּר. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן לֵית כָּאן מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה וְעַד אַרְבָּעָה. יֵשׁ כָּאן פִּירְצָה שְׁלֹשָׁה אֵין כָּאן מְקוֹם אַרְבָּעָה. מָתִיב רִבִּי מָנָא וְהָתַנִּינָן מַקִּיפִין בְּקָנִים וְקָנֶה יֵשׁ לוֹ מָקוֹם. אָמַר לֵיהּ לֹא תְתִיבֵינִי פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁכָּל־הַפָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה כְסָתוּם הוּא. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן בְּשֵׁם רַב מִכָּל־מָקוֹם מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהָעוֹמֵד רָבָה עַל הַפָּרוּץ מוּתָּר. “82This paragraph is also in Eruvin1:8, fol. 19b/c. The baraita is similar to Tosephta Kilaim 4:6 quoted also in Babli Eruvin 16a. The main difference between Yerushalmi and Babli-Tosephta is that in the latter source, each breach has to be smaller than the surrounding wall whereas in the Yerushalmi only the total length of standing wall has to be larger than the total length of the missing parts. It turns out that concerning kilaim everything less than three hand-breadths is considered closed83An opening of less than three hand-breadths in a wall is disregarded.. From three to four, if what is standing is more than what is torn down it is permitted, but if what is torn down is more than what is standing, it is forbidden. From four hand-breadths84The context and all corroborating evidence show that instead of ארבע (fem.) one has to read ארבעה (masc.), referring to hand-breadths, not cubits. In computing the total length of the torn-down parts, breaches smaller than three hand-breadths in width are disregarded. to ten cubits, if what is standing is more than what is torn down, it is permitted; but if what is torn down is more than what is standing it is permitted where it is standing85The Babli notes that not only are breaches up to three hand-breadths long disregarded as holes, but also standing pieces of wall up to three hand-breadths wide are disregarded as walls. This is the background of the discussion later in this paragraph., forbidden where it is torn down. Concerning the Sabbath, everything less than three hand-breadths is considered closed. From three to four, and from four hand-breadths to ten cubits, it is permitted if what is standing is more than what is torn down, but forbidden if what is torn down is more than what is standing. More than ten, it is forbidden even though what is standing is more than what is torn down.” Rebbi Ḥananiah, Rebbi Judah bar Pazi, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: There is no “from three to four.86R. Joḥanan wants to eliminate the middle part of the baraita, the one dealing with breaches of between three and four hand-breadths, in case that the standing walls also are in pieces less than four hand-breadths wide. While a hole wider than three hand-breadths is considered a breach, a wall narrower than four hand-breadths is not a wall. In that case, there are only holes and no wall at all; the entire wall should be considered as non-existent! He requires in this case that any sown field should be at least four cubits distant from the vineyard.” There is a hole of three and no place of four! Rebbi Mana objected: Did we not state: “One surrounds with reeds,” does a reed form a place87Mishnah Eruvin 1:9. Since the reeds are counted and no reed is even one hand-breadth wide, any piece of wall should be considered a wall. The answer is that as long as no two reeds are three hand-breadths distant from each other, the entire dividing fence is considered a solid wall.? He said to him, do not object to me from a breach less than three hand-breadths, since anything less than three is considered closed! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav: In any case, since what is standing is more than what is torn down, it is permitted88This explicitly rejects the text of Babli/Tosephta, that no single hole may be wider than both adjacent pieces of standing wall; the wall is valid as long as the combined length of standing wall (of at least 4 hand-breadths length) is larger than the combined length of the breaches..