那一断若是 拉夫 的,拉夫 前后两句相违之处就有两层难通。其一,那巷道两头相对开向公共区;其二,是为着 拉夫耶利米·巴尔·阿巴 说 拉夫 说的那一句:巷道若沿后墙整条破了口通着一个院子、那院子又在对面破了口通着公共区,院里搬运是许的,巷内搬运是禁的,因为那巷道如今两头相对开向公共区了。这何以要这样断呢?照这情形,它岂不该像那尽头通后院的巷道一样——拉夫犹大 断说那样的巷道什么都不必作,就许搬运了么?
-
那一断若是 拉夫 的,拉夫 前后两句相违之处就有两层难通。
For if it is a ruling of Rav, the apparent contradiction between one statement of Rav and another statement of Rav poses a difficulty in two ways.
-
其一,是这巷道两头相对开向公共区;其二,是为着 拉夫耶利米·巴尔·阿巴 说 拉夫 说的那一句:巷道若沿它后墙整条破了口、通着一个院子,那院子又在对面破了口、通着公共区,院里搬运是许的,巷内搬运是禁的,因为那巷道如今两头相对开向公共区了。
The first is with regard to the fact that this alleyway opens into the public domain on two opposite sides, and the second is based on that which Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said that Rav said: If an alleyway was breached along the entire length of its back wall into a courtyard, and likewise the courtyard was breached opposite it into the public domain, it is permitted to carry in the courtyard, and it is prohibited to carry in the alleyway, since this alleyway is now open on two opposite sides to the public domain.
-
这何以要这样断呢?
Why should this be the ruling?
-
照这一样情形,它岂不该像那尽头通着后院的巷道一样——拉夫犹大 断说那样的巷道什么都不必作,就许人搬运了么?
In this case, let it be like an alleyway that terminates in a backyard, where Rav Yehuda ruled that nothing further is needed to permit carrying.