(Mishnah): If it has Tzuras ha'Pesach, even if the width exceeds 10, it need not be reduced.

Question: We find that Tzuras ha'Pesach permits a Mavoy that is too wide, and Amaltra (the forms of nests or long cedar boards - 3a) permits a Mavoy that is too tall. Does each of these permit also the other?

Answer - part 1 (Beraisa): If a Mavoy is more than 20 Amos tall, it must be lowered;

If it has Tzuras ha'Pesach, it need not be lowered.

Question: Does Amaltra permit a Mavoy that is too wide?

Answer (Beraisa): If a Mavoy is more than 20 Amos tall, it must be reduced;

If it is wider than 10 Amos, it must be reduced;

If it has Tzuras ha'Pesach, it need not be reduced.

If it has Amaltra, it need not be reduced.

Suggestion: The last clause (regarding Amaltra) refers to the Seifa (if it is too wide)!

Rejection: [Perhaps] it refers to the Reisha (if it is too tall).

Rav Yehudah (to Chiya bar Rav): It need not be reduced.

Rav (to Rav Yehudah): [Even if it has Tzuras ha'Pesach,] it must be reduced!

Inference (Rav Yosef): This shows that if most of [the perimeter of] a Chatzer is openings and windows, it is not permitted through Tzuras ha'Pesach.

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: An opening more than 10 Amos forbids a Mavoy, and Parutz Merubah Al ha'Omed forbids a Chatzer. Just like Tzuras ha'Pesach does not permit more than 10, it does not permit Parutz Merubah.

Question: We cannot learn from an opening more than 10, since it is not permitted for Pasei Bira'os according to R. Meir, whereas all permit Parutz Merubah for Pasei Bira'os!

Support (Beraisa): If walls [of a Chatzer] are Ruban (mostly) openings and windows, it is permitted, as long as there is Omed Merubah Al ha'Parutz.

Objection: If they are mostly openings and windows, this is Parutz Merubah!

Correction: Rather, if Riban (there are many) openings and windows, it is permitted, as long as there is Omed Merubah Al ha'Parutz.

Rejection (Rav Kahana): The Beraisa refers to Shimai (desolate or broken) openings.

Question: What are considered Shimai openings?

Answer #1 (Rav Rechumi or Rav Yosef): The sides are not straight. (Rather, they are jagged. E.g. rocks were removed and some remaining rocks jut out);

Answer #2 (The other of Rav Rechumi and Rav Yosef): There is nothing on top of the opening.

R. Yochanan agrees with Rav;

(Ravin bar Rav Ada): A case occurred in which a man inserted four poles in the corners of a field and strung a vine over them. Chachamim permitted regarding Kil'ayim (they are like walls to permit growing vines inside and grain just outside);

(Reish Lakish): Just like they permitted regarding Kil'ayim, they permitted regarding Shabbos;

(R. Yochanan): They permitted regarding Kil'ayim, but not regarding Shabbos.

Question: What is the case?

Suggestion: He strung the vines to the side. [They are not attached to the tops of the poles, rather, somewhere in the middle.]

Rejection: Rav Chisda taught that Tzuras ha'Pesach to the side does nothing! (Reish Lakish would not permit regarding Shabbos.)

Answer: He strung the vines on top of the poles.

Question: How big was the gap between poles?

If it was [at most] 10, R. Yochanan would not forbid regarding Shabbos!

Answer: It was more than 10.

Rejection: Really, it was 10, and to the side. They argue about Rav Chisda's law. (Reish Lakish holds that Tzuras ha'Pesach to the side helps.)

Contradiction: [If so] R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish both contradict themselves!

(Reish Lakish citing R. Yehudah bar Chanina): Pei'ah (a vine stretched from one pole to another) permits regarding Kil'ayim, but not regarding Shabbos;

(R. Yochanan): Just like it is not a wall regarding Shabbos, it is not a wall regarding Kil'ayim.

Answer - part 1 (for Reish Lakish): Reish Lakish himself holds that it is a wall for both. His latter teaching merely cited the opinion of R. Yehudah bar Chanina. He does not agree.

Question: The contradiction in R. Yochanan remains!

If we would say that his first teaching discusses vines on top of the poles, we could answer that the latter discusses vines to the sides;

However, the rejection (m) asserts that also his first teaching discusses vines to the sides!

Answer - part 2: Both teachings discuss vines to the sides. In the first, there are 10 Amos between poles. In the second, there are more than 10.

Question: What is the source to distinguish between 10 and more than 10?

Answer: R. Yochanan told Reish Lakish that when R. Yehoshua went to learn Torah from R. Yochanan ben Nuri, he found him sitting between trees with vines strung between them. Even though R. Yehoshua was proficient in Hilchos Kil'ayim, he asked if one may grow vines inside the trees and grain outside;

R. Yochanan ben Nuri: If there are 10 Amos between poles, it is permitted. If there are more than 10, it is forbidden.

Question: What was the case?

Suggestion: He strung the vines on top of the poles.

Rejection (Beraisa): If poles were inserted in the ground and he made Pei'ah on top, even if the poles are more than 10 from each other, it is permitted.

Answer: He strung the vines to the sides of the poles.

Summation of answer: He strung them to the sides, and it is permitted only if they are at most 10 from each other.

(Rav Chisda): Tzuras ha'Pesach to the side does nothing.

(Rav Chisda): Tzuras ha'Pesach must be strong enough to hold a door. Even a door of straw suffices.

(Reish Lakish): Tzuras ha'Pesach requires Heker Tzir.

Question: What is this?

Answer (Rav Avya): It is a hole [in the Korah above (R. Chananel) and a hole below in the floor (Ri'az, in Shiltei Giborim on Rif)] for a hinge-pin (a pole on which a door swings).

Rav Acha brei d'Rav Avya: Did Rav Ashi teach anything about Tzuras ha'Pesach?

Talmidim of Rav Ashi: He did not.

(Beraisa): Tzuras ha'Pesach is a stick on each side and a stick on top of them. (Rabbeinu Meir (brought in Rosh) - Rav Acha brings this Beraisa, which does not require the Korah to be a Tefach thick. It can be Mashehu (arbitrarily small). Surely, Heker Tzir is required, for no one argues with Reish Lakish. Ri'az - the Korah can be Mashehu, i.e. it need not be big enough for Heker Tzir.)

Question: Must the top stick touch the others?

Answer #1 (Rav Nachman): It need not touch.

Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes): It must touch.

Rav Nachman relied on his leniency to make a Tzuras ha'Pesach for the Reish Galusa (the executive head of Bnei Yisrael in Bavel). Rav Sheshes told his attendant, Rav Gada, to knock it down. He obeyed. (Perhaps Rav Sheshes was unable to do so himself, for he was blind). People of the Reish Galusa's house incarcerated him. Rav Sheshes came to the door and requested that Gada come out. They let him out. (Ya'avetz - they had assumed that he himself decided to knock it down. When they heard that Rav Sheshes told him to, they released him.)

Rav Sheshes (to Rabah bar Shmuel): Do you know any Beraisos about Tzuras ha'Pesach?

(Rabah bar Shmuel - Beraisa - R. Meir): If [the opening of] a gate is shaped like a dome [on top, and below has Raglayim, i.e. straight side walls separated by at least four Tefachim], one must affix a Mezuzah. (It is a proper opening due to the Raglayim, even though the dome separates between them and the top - this refutes Rav Sheshes);

Chachamim exempt.

All agree that if the Raglayim are 10 Tefachim tall, it needs a Mezuzah.

(Abaye): All agree that if it (the total height) is less than 10 Tefachim or if the Raglayim are less than three Tefachim tall, it is exempt;

They argue in a case where the Raglayim are [at least] three and it is [at least] 10, and at the height of 10 it is less than four Tefachim wide, but there is room in the wall to carve out and complete the width to four. R. Meir says Chokekim Lehashlim (it is considered as if enough was carved out to complete the Shi'ur), and Chachamim do not. (See Perush Chai diagram, Perek 1 number 153, in the English Charts section.)

Rav Sheshes (to Rabah bar Shmuel): If you encounter people of the Reish Galusa's house, do not mention this Beraisa.

(Mishnah - Beis Shamai): Hechsher (what is necessary to permit carrying in a) Mavoy is a Lechi and a Korah;

Beis Hillel say, it is a Lechi or a Korah.

R. Eliezer says, it is Lechayayim (one Lechi on each side).

A Talmid citing R. Yishmael said in front of R. Akiva that Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel agree that a Lechi or Korah permits a Mavoy [if the width of the opening is] less than four Amos. Beis Shamai require a Lechi and Korah only if it is between four and 10 Amos;

R. Akiva: They argue in both cases (more or less than four Amos).

(Gemara) Question: Our Mishnah is not like Chananyah (6a, who says that all require a door on at least one side) nor like Chachamim [who require Tzuras ha'Pesach]!

Answer (Rav Yehudah): (Chananyah and Chachamim discuss a Mavoy Mefulash.) Our Mishnah discusses a Mavoy Sasum;

Beis Shamai require a Lechi and a Korah, and Beis Hillel require a Lechi or Korah.

Inference: Beis Shamai require a Lechi and a Korah [to make a proper Mechitzah] because they hold that mid'Oraisa, Reshus ha'Yachid needs four walls!

Rejection: They hold that three walls [make Reshus ha'Yachid mid'Oraisa, and] are Mechayev one who throws to there [from Reshus ha'Rabim]. They require four walls to carry [mid'Rabanan].

Inference: Beis Hillel require only a Lechi or a Korah (a mere Heker for the fourth wall. They require three proper walls) because they hold that mid'Oraisa, three walls makes Reshus ha'Yachid!

Rejection: They require only two walls regarding [Chiyuv for] throwing. They require three [proper] walls [mid'Rabanan] to carry. (Rashba - we merely show that one cannot bring a proof from here. Really, they require three walls mid'Oraisa. Only R. Yehudah says that two suffice.)