{"collection":"Judaism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/jud/etm/etm048.htm","path":"jud/etm/etm048.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/jud/etm/etm048.htm","text":"Eighteen Treatises from the Mishna, by D. A. Sola and M. J. Raphall, [1843]\n\u00a7 1. Should an entry be higher than twenty amoth, [its height] must be lessened [by lowering the cross-beam]. R. Jehudah saith, \"This is not necessary; should it be wider than ten amoth [its width] must be lessened; but if it has tine form [appearance] of a door [gate], even though it be wider than ten amoth, it is not necessary to lessen [its width].\"\n\u00a7 2. To legalize [the carrying or conveying within] an entry [to a place inclosed on three sides], Beth Shammai hold, \"[that] a post and a beam [are required];\" but Beth Hillel hold, \"[that either] post or beam [is sufficient];\" R. Eleazar saith, \"two posts.\" On the authority of R. Ishmael, a disciple stated before R. Akivah \"Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel did not differ [in opinion] as to an\nentry less than four amoth wide, [for they both agreed that] such [an entry] becomes legalized either through a beam or a post.\" On what did they differ? [Respecting] entries upwards of four amoth wide, and up to ten amoth: of these Beth Shammai hold, \"that a post and a beam are required;\" while Beth Hillel hold, \"[that either] post or beam [is sufficient].\" R. Akivah said, \"They differ as to the one and as to the other.\"\n\u00a7 3. The beam in question must be wide enough to receive an \u05d0\u05e8\u05d9\u05d7, which is half of a brick, three hands in length and in width; it is, however, sufficient that the beam be one hand wide, so as to hold a half brick lengthwise.\n\u00a7 4. [The beam must be] wide enough to hold a half brick, [and also] sound enough to bear one. R. Jehudah saith, \"It must be wide [enough], even though it be not sound [enough].\"\n\u00a7 5. [Should the beam] be of straw or of reed, it is [in law] regarded as if it were of metal; should it be crooked [bent outwards], it is [in law] regarded as if it were straight; should it be cylindrical, it is [in law] regarded as if it were square. Whatever [measures] three hands in its circumference, holds one hand in width. 1\n\u00a7 6. The posts in question, must be ten hands high, be their breadth and thickness whatever it may: R. Jos\u00e9 saith, \"Their width must be three hands.\"\n\u00a7 7. [Such] posts may be made out of any thing, even of that which is possessed of life; [this last, however,] R. Jos\u00e9 prohibits. [A living animal tied on a grave to close it up] communicates uncleanness [even after it be removed therefrom]. R. Meir saith it is clean, \"A letter of divorce for a woman may also be written thereon 2 [a living animal];\" but R. Jos\u00e9, the Galil\u00e6an, pronounces it \"[the letter of divorce so written] null, [not valid in law].\"\n\u00a7 8. Should a caravan encamp in a valley, and a fence be made around it with the cattle's gear, it is lawful to move things within the fence [on the day of rest]; provided always that the fence be ten hands high, and the gaps [open spaces] therein, do not exceed [in extent] the actual fencing. Every gap [avenue] which is about ten hands [wide], is permitted; for it is considered as a door [gate], [hut gaps which are] more than ten hands wide are prohibited.\n\u00a7 9. [The caravan may also be] fenced round with three ropes, one above the other; provided always there be between each rope less than three hands [interspace], and that the measure [width or thickness] of the three ropes [together] exceed one hand, so that the whole make up [the] ten hands.\n\u00a7 10. The caravan may also be fenced round with cane-laths; provided always the interspace between cane and cane be less than three hands. [All these regulations are limited to] spoken of a caravan [only]. Such is the dictum of R. Jehudah; but the sages maintain, \"[that] the caravan is [especially] spoken of, solely [in order to adduce an instance] from that which actually exists.\" 3 Any partition which is not [constructed on the principle] of warp and shoot is not a [lawful] partition. Such is the dictum of R. Jos\u00e9 bar Jehudah; but the sages hold, \"[the constructing it according to] either one of the two [principles is sufficient].\" Four immunities have been granted [to warriors] in a camp: they may bring wood from any place [without respecting the rights of ownership]; they need not wash their hands before meals; they may eat of \u05d3\u05de\u05d0\u05d9; 4 and they are absolved from the obligation of erub. 5\n72:1 This computation is but approximative. The exact proportion of the diameter to the circumference, is as 100 to 314.\n72:2 Vide Treatise Gittin, chap. II. \u00a7 3.\n73:3 Consequently, all these rules and regulations apply to the single traveller; who also enjoys the benefit thereof, should he encamp on the day of rest.\n73:4 Fruit or corn, respecting which it is doubtful whether the legal dues [heave-offering], tithes, &c., have been acquitted or not.\n73:5 Combining the different tents which compose the camp.","title":"Eighteen Treatises from the Mishna: XIII. Treatise Erubin...","type":"page"}