(Mishnah): Which type of courtyard obligates completed produce in Ma'asros (as if they've been brought into the house)?

(R. Yishmael): (If it's like) a courtyard in Tzur, where the contents are protected by a guard at the entrance.

(R. Akiva): If (for example, the courtyard contains two houses and) when one person opens, the other person (objects and) closes (and vice-versa, it is not considered protected and) it's exempt.

(R. Nechemia): If a person would not be embarrassed to eat there, it is obligated.

(R. Yosi): If when a stranger enters and nobody asks him what he's doing there, it is exempt.

(R. Yehuda): If there are two courtyards, one within the other, the inner one is obligated and the outer one is exempt.

Roofs are exempt, even though they belong to a courtyard that does obligate.

A gatehouse, portico or balcony are like the courtyard and if it obligates, they obligate.

A (cone-shaped) hut, a Borganin (field storage room) and a shed are exempt.

Huts of Ginosar, even if they contain millstones and roosters (which were usually kept in private courtyards), they are exempt.

A potter's hut - the inner room obligates and the outer room exempts.

(R. Yosi): Anything which is not dwelled in both in the summer and winter is exempt.

Sukkos used on the festival - R. Yehuda obligates and the Chachamim exempt.

(Gemara): (The Mishnah asked) Which type of courtyard?

(Baraisa)(R. Yishmael): Wherever a guard sits at the entrance to guard it.

(R. Shmuel bar Nachman citing R. Yochanan): All of these definitions are learned from the Torah obligating a house, as the pasuk states (Devarim 26:13), "I have removed the Holy portion from the house''. (The Chachamim decreed that anything that resembles a house also obligates.)

Shimon said (to the students of the Beis Midrash) in front of R. Yochanan that the Halacha follows the stringent views of all of the Tannaim in the Mishnah.

Why didn't Shimon explicitly say this in the name of R. Yochanan? So that they would not question him from the later statement of R. Yochanan.

(Tosefta) (R. Shimon ben Elazar citing R. Akiva): (R. Akiva's statement in the Mishnah that if (for example, the courtyard contains two houses and) when one person opens, the other person (objects and) closes (and vice-versa, it is not considered protected and) it's exempt; it applies to two owners but not two tenants.

Question: What's the difference? Surely both owners and tenants are able to protest?

Answer (R. Yona): It's discussing an owner that rented out one of the houses. The owner can protest the tenant, but not vice-versa. (Therefore, the courtyard is considered protected by the owner and it obligates in Maaser.)

Concerning this Baraisa, Shimon said (to the students of the Beis Midrash) in front of R. Yochanan that the Halacha follows R. Shimon ben Elazar in the name of R. Akiva (that two if the courtyard has two owners, it is not considered protected and is exempt).

(R. Yona): Zeira and R. Imi both cited from R. Yochanan that the Halacha follows R. Shimon ben Elazar in the name of R. Akiva.

(R. Imi): R. Yochanan ruled to the students of the House of R. Imi this way.

Question (R. Bun bar Chiya to R. Zeira): What's R. Yehuda adding to R. Akiva (in the Mishnah)?

Answer (R. Zeira to R. Bun bar Chiya): Nothing. (He just related it as he had heard it from R. Akiva.)

(R. Elazar): (When the Mishnah taught that roofs are exempt,) it's even when the roof is completely surrounded by the courtyard.

Question: Why didn't it become Tevel when it was brought there through the courtyard?

Answer: The Mishnah could follow R. Yosi bei R. Yehuda (at the beginning of this Perek, that since his intent when he took it through the courtyard was to eat it on the roof, it didn't become Tevel). And even if it follows Rebbi (there), it's different here as he originally planned to taking it to his roof to dry, so it wasn't yet complete when he took it through his courtyard.

(R. Avin): Roofs are exempt only when they measure at least 4 by 4 Amos. Just as a house only causes Tevel when it's at least 4 by 4, so too a roof only exempts from that size.

Support (Baraisa): A house that does not measure 4 by 4 Amos is exempt from Mezuzah, from building a fence around its roof, from contributing food towards an Eiruv and from obligating Ma'asros. It cannot be used to extend the limits of a city to join it with another city; one who vows against benefitting from houses may dwell in it; it does not receive an area of 4 Amos in front of it in a courtyard; if it was sold, the seller doesn't lose his right to redeem it after a year and if he didn't redeem it, it returns to him in Yovel; and the owner would not return from the battlefront if he hadn't yet inaugurated it.

(The Mishnah taught that a Borganin (a field storage room) is exempt from Ma'asros.) Does this even apply to its owner?

Answer (Baraisa): 'A house used to teach children Tanach, Mishnah or Talmud obligates the teacher, but not others that transfer their fruit there.' This shows that a Borganin obligates the owner but not others.

Rebbi says that a 4 by 4 Amah house obligates in Ma'asros even if it doesn't have 4 walls.

R. Shimon says it when the house has 4 walls, even without being 4 by 4 Amos.

R.Yosi says that it must be 4 by 4 Amos and have 4 walls.

R. Yehuda says the same for the obligation of Mezuzah (as he did in our Mishnah about Maaser, that Sukkos used on the festival obligate).

It's logical to say that R. Yehuda agrees with Rabbanan (that a house must be 4 by 4 and have 4 walls to obligate) but not vice-versa; as Rabbanan would not say that a Sukkos on the festival obligates in Mezuzah and Maaser.