(Rav Chanin bar Rava): A Mavoy can have a Pirtzah of up to 10 Amos in its side [if four Tefachim remain near the opening], and [if the opening was too wide and was diminished by a wall] up to [but not including] four Tefachim in its 'head' (that wall).

Question: Presumably, it can have a Pirtzah of up to 10 Amos in the side, because this is like a doorway. The same should apply to its head!

Answer (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): The Pirtzah in the head is actually in the corner. People do not make doorways in the corner.

(Rav Huna): It cannot have a Pirtzah more than four Tefachim in either place.

Rav Huna (to Rav Chanin bar Rava): Do not argue with me. Rav visited a certain place, and ruled about a particular Mavoy like me!

Rebuttal (Rav Chanin): Rav saw a need to be stringent beyond the letter of the law.

Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak: Presumably, Rav Huna is correct:

(Rav): [The Tikun for] a bent Mavoy (like the picture in Rashi) is like [that for] a Mavoy Mefulash (it is straight and open on both ends. The latter needs a Lechi or Korah on one end, and Tzuras ha'Pesach on the other. A bent Mavoy is like two Mavo'os Mefulashim, for we consider each to be open at the bend (where they meet) to Reshus ha'Rabim. Therefore, we require Tzuras ha'Pesach at the bend, and Lechi or Korah at each opening to Reshus ha'Rabim.)

(Shmuel): A bent Mavoy is like a Mavoy Sasum (closed on three sides. Therefore, a bent Mavoy needs only Lechi or Korah on each opening (Rashi). Rashi's Rebbi requires also a Lechi or Korah at the bend).

Question: What is the case?

If the width [at the bend] is more than 10 Amos, Shmuel would not consider it like a Mavoy Sasum! (Surely, it is like one long Mavoy open to Reshus ha'Rabim on both ends, i.e. Mefulash. Alternatively, he would not say that a Lechi at the bend permits, for a Lechi does not permit an opening more than 10 Amos. According to Tosfos (DH v'Lechi), who holds that a Lechi permits if its thickness diminishes the gap to at most 10, the difficulty is that Shmuel did not specify how thick the Lechi must be.)

Answer: The width is at most 10, and Rav considers it Mefulash. [Since he does not require more than 10, surely] he considers [even] four Tefachim to be a Pirtzah on the side!

Answer (Rav Chanin bar Rava): The Pirtzah for a bent Mavoy is smaller, because many people go through it (each end opens to Reshus ha'Rabim).

Inference: Rav Huna holds that the Pirtzah cannot exceed four Tefachim [even for a regular Mavoy,] even if many people do not go through it (e.g. it opens to a muddy area).

Question: Why is this different than the law of R. Ami and R. Asi (if part of a side wall was broken, and four Tefachim of the wall remain by the opening, it permits a Pirtzah up to 10 Amos)?

Answer: There, even where it was breached, three or four Tefachim of the wall remain [at the bottom]. Rav Huna does not allow a breach of four Tefachim when nothing remains.

(Beraisa #1) Question: How can we Me'arev (permit carrying in) a Reshus ha'Rabim [with walls on two sides? Normally, 'Me'arev' means to put food jointly owned by members of a Chatzer in one of the houses to permit carrying in the Chatzer.]

Answer #1: One makes Tzuras ha'Pesach [across Reshus ha'Rabim] on one side, and Lechi or Korah on the other side. (See note 1 in Appendix.)

Answer #2 (Chananyah): Beis Shamai requires a door on each side, and to lock it when going in or out;

Beis Hillel requires a door on one side, and a Lechi or Korah on the other side.

Question: May one really Me'arev Reshus ha'Rabim like this [according to Chachamim]?!

(Beraisa #2): R. Yehudah said an even bigger Chidush. If one owns two houses on opposite sides of Reshus ha'Rabim, he puts a Lechi on each side [of one house, near it] or a Korah on each side, and he may carry in the middle. (He holds that two walls make a Reshus ha'Yachid mid'Oraisa. The Lechayayim are needed to permit carrying even mid'Rabanan. Neither Tana of Beraisa #1 holds like R. Yehudah. Both of them require a door or Tzuras ha'Pesach);

Chachamim: We cannot be Me'arev Reshus ha'Rabim like this!

Suggestion: Chachamim say that we cannot be Me'arev like this, but we can be Me'arev with a door [on one side, even if it is not locked, like Beis Hillel]!

Rejection (Rabah bar bar Chanah): Had they not locked the doors of Yerushalayim at night, it would have been Reshus ha'Rabim, and one who carried in it would have been liable;

(Ula): If they didn't lock the doors of the Mavo'os Mefulashim of Mechuza at night, they would be Reshus ha'Rabim.

Answer (Rav Yehudah): The Beraisa asks, how are we Me'arev Mavo'os Mefulashim? One makes Tzuras ha'Pesach on one side, and Lechi or Korah (some texts - Lechi and Korah) on the other side...

(Rav): The Halachah follows the first Tana.

(Shmuel): The Halachah follows Chananyah.

Question: According to Beis Hillel according to Chananyah, must one lock the door?

Answer (Rav Yehudah citing Shmuel): One need not lock it.

Version #1: Rav Masnah said similarly in the name of Shmuel.

Version #2 (Rav Masnah): A case occurred, and Shmuel told me that one need not lock it. (end of Version #2)

Question: Must one lock the doors?

Answer #1 (Rav Anan): The [doors of the] Mavo'os Mefulashim are half-covered in dirt (they cannot be closed), yet Shmuel walks through and does not comment!

Rejection (Rav Kahana): Those doors were only slightly open.

Answer #2: Rav Nachman commanded to clear the dirt away from the doors [to enable closing them].

Suggestion: Rav Nachman holds that the doors must be closed.

Rejection: No, he requires only that it is possible to close them.

There was a bent Mavoy in Neharda'a (both ends opened to Reshus ha'Rabim in the same direction, like Rashi's picture). They applied to it the stringencies of Rav and Shmuel, and required doors [at both bends]

They were stringent like Rav, who considers it like a Mavoy Mefulash;

Question: Rav says that the Halachah follows the first Tana (who says that Tzuras ha'Pesach and Lechi or Korah suffice to be Me'arev Reshus ha'Rabim. He never requires doors)!

Answer: They required doors like Shmuel, who rules like Chananyah.

Question: Shmuel considers a bent Mavoy like a Mavoy Sasum!

Answer: They were stringent like Rav, who considers it like a Mavoy Mefulash.

Question: One should not follow both stringencies!

(Beraisa): The Halachah always follows Beis Hillel; one may choose to follow Beis Shamai, or Beis Hillel;

If one follows the leniencies of both, he is wicked;

It says about one who follows the stringencies of both [when they are inconsistent] "veha'Kesil ba'Choshech Yelech"(a fool walks in darkness).

Rather, one should consistently follow Beis Shamai, or consistently follow Beis Hillel.

Question: The Beraisa contradicts itself!

First it says that the Halachah always follows Beis Hillel - then it says that one may choose to follow Beis Shamai!

Answer #1: Before the Bas Kol (voice from Heaven) announced that the Halachah follows Beis Hillel, one could choose to follow Beis Shamai; after the Bas Kol, the Halachah follows Beis Hillel.

Answer #2: The entire Beraisa is after the Bas Kol.

The first Tana says that we heed a Bas Kol; the second Tana is R. Yehoshua, who does not heed a Bas Kol.