Daf 52

1) You view an uneven shaped city as if it's squared. So, even if you have places that protrude or come in, you would draw a line from the most north point, and do that for all directions until the city is within a square, and you only count the T'chum from the end of the square.

Daf 55

2) However, if the city is a rectangle, you don't extend the city further to make it into a square with equal sides. Also, even if it's a square that's not set up in the directions of the world, but have its corners pointing in those directions, you don't make a square around it to make the sides facing the four directions, but you leave it as is.

3) If a 'Pogem' sticks out of the city [Rashi: a turret in the wall. Tosfos; a dove coop shaped building], you extend the drawn line of the square to fit it in. Even if you have two of them protruding from opposite sides of the city, you extend the line on both sides.

4) If the city is in the shape of a bow, or two perpendicular rows, making two sides of the square, we view it as if the whole city is filled with houses and courtyards (making a complete square) and only count the T'chum from the edge of the square.

5) R' Huna says; if you have a city with the shape of a bow, if the two ends of the bow are within four thousand Amos of each other, we would draw and imaginary string between them (to make it like the string of a bow that you shoot arrows with) and you can start counting your T'chum (when you leave the middle of the bow and walk between the two ends) from that line. If it's more than that between them, those in the middle can only count their T'chum from the middle of the bow, i.e., when they leave the city. [Tosfos says: it's not exact that they must measure from the end of the city, since the bow shaped city bends and becomes narrower as it gets closer to the middle, they can count from the place where the sides of the bow are within four thousand Amos from each other. R' Chananal, however, to avoid this problem, explains that we refer to a city that has three straight lines, (i.e., shaped like the letter Ches), so that it never gets narrower, and thus, the middle line can only count from the edge of their city.

Tosfos says: perhaps, this is only the Halacha by a bow shaped city, but if it's squared, but two 'Pogems' sticks out on the extremes of one side of the city, even many of them that go out of the cities' outskirts, you would draw the line across both of them though they might be more than four thousand Amos apart since they're more Batul to the main part of the city than by the bow, since the ends of the bow are also the main parts of the city. However, the Ri says that we only allow drawing the line between the 'Pogems' if they're within four thousand Amos of each other.]

6) We only say that we can make it into one city if it's within four thousand Amos if they're connected on one side (like the two ends of the bow are connected through the bow's middle). However, if a city is split completely from start to finish, then you can't consider them as one city if the space is more than one hundred and forty one and a third Amos, which is the space of two 'Karfeifs' (which is seventy and two thirds Amos apiece), which is the amount we need to connect any two cities.

7) If the two ends of the bow are within four thousand Amos of each other; Rabbah b. R' Huna held that the imaginary drawn string also needs to be within two thousand Amos of the middle of the bow. However, his son Rava held that it's fine even if it's not within two thousand Amos of the middle. Abaya says that this opinion makes the most sense since he may get to the middle of that string anyhow, by walking down one of the sides of the city to the end, and then he can walk less than two thousand Amos to get to the middle of the string. [Tosfos explains: according to Rabbah b. R' Huna, the middle of the string must be within the T'chum from every side (i.e., from both of the ends, and from the middle). His son Rava held that it only needs to be within the T'chum from one of the sides. Therefore, he would hold that, if the string is within two thousand Amos from the middle, the ends don't need to be within four thousand Amos from each other.]

8) If a broken house has three walls intact, you can count it as a house at the end of the city to start the T'chum from, and the Gemara has an unresolved inquiry whether if you can also count it if it has two walls and a roof.

9) you can count a house on an island in the sea, but not a houseboat. Any place that people live can be counted, but not those that people don't live in.

10) You can't count a cave as part of the city (even if someone lives there) unless there is a building added on to its entrance. The reason why we can't count from there anyhow because of the added on building by itself is because you need to combine it [Rashi explains; it doesn't have the proper Shiur of four Amos, and it needs the combination of the cave to make it so. Tosfos says; it would seem that the building needs to, at least, be most of the four Amos. Tosfos gives another explanation: we can refer to a case where the building is four Amos, still, you need to combine the cave to count the T'chum from the end of the cave, and not only from the end of the building.]

11) People in tent cities must measure their T'chum from their doors, since they don't have an established city to say that you count from the last tent unless you also have there three real courtyards with two real houses apiece.

12) Although the Jews in the desert lived in tents, still, they're considered more of an established community since the Pasuk says "they encamped through the command of Hashem." Therefore, we consider the whole Jews' encampment as one city, and they can walk the whole area and two thousand Amos out of it.

Daf 56

13) You need to square it off in a way that the sides are facing the four directions of the world. A sign to know where those directions are; the calf constellation is in the north, and the scorpian is in the south. If you don't recognize these, R' Yossi holds that you can tell the sides according to the rise of the sun. In the long days, the sun rises in the northeast and sets in the northwest. In the short days, it rises in the southeast and sets in the southwest. During the equinox, the sun rises due east, and sets due west. R' Misharshiya doesn't hold of this rule. He holds that the sun never rises in the true northeast or southeast, nor set in the true northwest and southwest.

Daf 57

14) R' Meir says that you give a 'Karfeif' size outskirts to a city (that you only start counting the T'chum after it). The Chachumim say that they only gave a Karfeif to combine adjacent cities. R' Huna says that the Chachumim gave a Karfeif for each city, so, they're combined if they're within one hundred forty one and a third Amos of each other. Chiya b. Rav says they only give one Karfeif for both of them, and they only combine if they're within seventy and two-thirds Amos of each other.[Tosfos says: we Paskin like R' Huna since he's greater than Chiya b. Rav. Also, many Amorayim held like him.]

15) [Tosfos says: according to R' Huna, you only connect two cities with two Karfeifs, but you can't connect a city to a single house unless it's within one Karfeif. However, you definitely combine them within one Karfeif, and you can even combine two houses within one Karfeif, or else there is no way to combine houses (that's not within a wall) to make them into one city.]

16) According to R' Huna [Tosfos: and in the Gemara's conclusion, this is even to Chiya b. Rav], if you have three cities, even if they're not in a row, but, if you would 'slide' one of them between the other two, there wouldn't be two Karfeifs between the outer ones and the 'inserted' middle one [or, according to Chiya b. Rav, one Karfeif between them], we consider them as one city, and a person from one outer city can walk the whole distance to the second outer city and two thousand Amos past it. However, Abaya says: this is only if the "inserted city' is within two thousand Amos of the other cities.

17) This, that we don't say also by the city with a shape of a bow that the middle of the bow is looked as inserted between the two ends of the bow to minimize the distance between them and permit even when there is more than four thousand Amos between them; since you can't fill it up. [Tosfos explains; if we insert the middle of the city as if it's between the ends, then, we can't also view it as if it's in its own space, and you wouldn't be able to walk to the other side of the city at all. After all, in the "three city" case, we don't allow the inserted city to gain any extra walking, for it only helps for the two outer cities. If so, then we should allow the people of the two ends of the bow to walk two thousand Amos pass the other end even if they're more than four thousand Amos apart, since they're similar to the two outer cities. Alternatively, we said that the case where we don't allow the middle of the city to the string is if it's more than two thousand Amos away (as Abaya is consistent to his opinion that Paskins like Rava b. Rabbah b. R' Huna that it's only forbidden if it's out of the T'chum from all sides), and here, we only allow the three cities if the inserted city is within two thousand Amos. Alternatively, since the middle part is too big to insert between the two ends, we don't insert it. The same would be if the third city was too large to insert between the two outer cities that we wouldn't say to look as if it was inserted.]

18) You can only measure with fifty Amos ropes (by using forty of them) since smaller ones will stretch more, and shorter ones will be too taut. R' Assi says that you use rope made from the vine that grows around a palm tree. R' Yosef taught that you use ones made from flax.

Daf 58

19) You only measure by placing the rope at the level of your heart (so that the measuring would be straight). If you get to a mountain or to a wide ditch, if you can 'swallow' the whole distance of the mountain or ditch with one rope, i.e., that it's less than fifty Amos as the crow flies, then you swallow it (by having them hold the rope on both sides of the mountain or ditch) then measure it that way, and then go back to regular measureing. However, you can't go outside the T'chum to swallow. [Rashi in his second explanation: to find an area that the ditch is less than fifty Amos wide in order to measure it this way (since people might confuse it and think that it's within the T'chum). Rashi in his first explanation: you can't go out of the T'chum when you swallow, and then count back the Amos that you went out of the T'chum down the ditch. However, Tosfos asks: it's not the true measurement since you originally measured straight and then you subtract the measurment with the slope. It wouldn't even help if you would measure on the rope over the ditch and drop a plumb line from there. After all, to make a measurement outside the T'chum, you would need to measure with a rope longer than fifty Amos, which we don't allow.] If you don't have an area within the T'chum to 'swallow' it, you do the "boring through the mountain" method. That is: you use four Amos ropes, the one on the lower ground holds it by his heart's level, and the one on the upper ground holds it by his leg's level. this way, you would make a straighter measurement without including the slope.

20) You can't do this "boring through the mountain" method when measuring the distance between a corpse and the surrounding cities to see who will bring the Egla Arufa, nor when measuring the T'chum of an Ir Miklat (i.e., sanctuary city), where the murderer will still be safe, since they're Torah law. (We're only lenient by T'chumim which is rabbinical law).

21) According to the first version of Rava, there are four levels of measuring. (1) if the slope is not steep, but the path has a ratio of being five Amos long as it gets raised ten Tefachim, you measure straight land and you don't do anything to remove the slope. (2) If the slope is steep enough that you have a ratio that the path is four Amos long as it gets raised ten Tefachim, then you 'swallow' the slope in raising a fifty Amos rope to go over the slope. If you can't 'swallow' it, then you 'bore through the mountains." (3) If the slope is not easy to walk on, [Tosfos: according to this version, we don't know how steep this is], we allow just estimating the distance without actually measuring through 'swallowing.' [Tosfos says that this Heter is only applicable to a mountain or a wall that's difficult to measure by 'swallowing.' However, by a wide ditch that's much easier to measure with 'swallowing,' you must always measure it through 'swallowing.'] Methods #2 and #3 is only if the ditch is not too deep. According to the Rabanan, it can't be a hundred Amos deep, and according to Acheirim, it can't be two thousand Amos deep. [Rashi: otherwise, you need to do the "boring through the mountain" method.] (4) If the slope is so steep that you can drop a plumb line to the bottom of the ditch and the top of the string wouldn't be four Amos away from the side of the ditch,we disregard the walls completely, and only measure the bottom of the ditch. [Tosfos quotes R' Yishmael who says that it doesn't matter how deep the ditch is, if it's a hundred Amos or if it's two thousand Amos, even though it's much easier to descend if the plumb line is two Amos away from the side of the ditch if it's a hundred Amos deep than if it's four Amos away when it's two thousand Amos deep.] This applies even if the sides of the ditch is greater than two thousand Amos.

22) According to the second version of Rava: there are only three levels. (1) If it's a ratio of five Amos long as it gets raised ten Tefachim, then you 'swallow' the slope. (2) If the slope is steep enough that you have a ratio that the path is four Amos long as it gets raised ten Tefachim, then it's not easily walked on, so you estimate the distance. (3) If the slope is so steep that you can drop a plumb line to the bottom of the ditch and the top of the string wouldn't be four Amos away from the side of the ditch, we disregard the walls completely, and only measure the bottom of the ditch.

23) [R' Tam explains the Sugya as follows: the explanation of "the plumb line goes down" refers to the slope. If the slope is straight (as a plumb line) so someone can walk down it (i.e., there is no rocks etc. to prevent someone from going down), even if it's steep, you measure it straight with the slope. (After all, the main Halacha is not to allow swallowing like we don't allow it by Egla Arufa and Ir Miklat.) However, if there are rocks there to prevent walking, then you swallow the whole ditch. According to the second version of R' Yosef, this is only so if, according to the Rabanan, if the ditch is a hundred Amos deep, or to Acheirim, two thousand Amos deep. However, if it's less, then you swallow the slope even if a person can walk down it relatively easy. According to the first version of R' Yosef, those Shiurim were only said if the rocks prevent you from walking down, but if there are no rocks, you can never 'swallow' the incline of the ditch. If the ditch isn't four Amos deep, then we measure the incline as if it would be flat land, since it's so shallow, we consider it as just an extention of the land. This is all by a ditch, or a man-made wall; but by a mountain, you can be lenient to swallow it even if you can walk up it. According to Rava's first version, as long as it's long four Amos as it rises ten Teachim, and according to the second version, even if it's five Amos long as it goes up ten Tefachim. However, if it's four Amos, then you can assess the thickness of the mountain without measuring.]

24) [R' Shmuel learns like Rashi, except he learns the part with the plumb line as follows: in R' Yosef's first version, when do we say that, if the plumb line is further than four Amos away from the edge of the ditch that you need to 'swallow' the whole width of the ditch, and not just measure the floor of the ditch and ignore the slope, is if it's less than two thousand Amos (like Acheirim), but if it's more, then even a bigger distance can be Batul and not measured. (The Chachumim will hold after a hundred Amos you can ignore the incline even if the plumb line is four Amos or more away from the edge.) The second version is that they argue when the plumb line is within four Tefachim to the edge, after those amounts you can measure the floor straight, but if it's more than four, then it's not Batul even if it's deeper than two thousand Amos.]

25) You don't measure the T'chum but from a Mumcha. [Rashi explains; from an expert measurer. Tosfos quotes R' Chananel: you must measure it from the straight path before you, and you don't shift the measurement to the sides of the city if they're flatter lands, and then move the mark where the T'chum's end is to the area directly before the city. After all, there may be mountains, ditches or walls on the path before the city that you would be able to 'swallow,' and, therefore, the measurement wouldn't be the same as the measurement to the side of the city.]

Daf 59

26) If you measured one side of the city from both corners of that side, and one is longer and the other shorter, you listen to the side that's longer. [Rashi explains: you mark the T'chum on the shorter side across what they marked from the longer side, since we can assume that it was the correct measurement. Tosfos explains: you accept that both measurements were correct, and there was no mistakes (and you don't need to mark the T'chum on the longer side as only up to the place that's across to the shorter side). After all, they both can be true, since one side might have the right to 'swallow' some incline that wasn't applicable to do on the second side.]

27) If one person measured it longer, and a second one measured it shorter, we listen to the longer one as long as he's not longer than the diagonal. [Rashi explains: we can then have what to assume how the shorter one made a mistake, that he measured to the diagonal of the city, (i.e., instead of measuring two thousand Amos straight north, where you will have an extra eight hundred Amos northwest when you square it off, he measured the northwest two thousand Amos, and straight north will be less when he squares it off. Tosfos quotes R' Chananel: if it's not more than the diagonal of the square city, since the shorter one could have measured the T'chum in the infancy of the city's history, where there was only a few houses on one corner of where the city is today. Therefore, now that the city is built, you would start you're measuring on the other side of the city which is a diagonal of today's city away from the original measuring.]

28) Even a woman, a slave and a maid is believed to say where the T'chum is. [Tosfos explains: the Gemara in Kesuvos seems to say that you need two people to testify, and you have one regular Jew testifying, but the slave can be the second witness. Alternatively, perhaps the Gemara only refers to other cases brought there that we believe them, although you regularly need two witnesses. However, regarding T'chumim, the slave is believed by himself.]

29) The reason they're believed since T'chumim is only a rabbinical decree. [Tosfos explains: women are only believed for Torah Halochos that they have the ability to make it Kosher, like Shchita, devein the Gid Hanashe, and to separate Truma and Challah. However, they wouldn't be believed for T'chum, since it's not in their ability to place the T'chum where they want. However, we see that we wouldn't believe a slave or woman to check for Chameitz if it would be a Torah requirement (and they're only believed since it's rabbinical, since, from the Torah, you can just Mivatel the Chametz); that's because it's a tremendous bother to check correctly, we're afraid that they'll be too lazy to do it properly more than the other Halachos that we believe her. This is also implied by the Yerushalmi.]

30) A city of individuals [Rashi: i.e., that doesn't have six hundred thousand people living there] that became a public city [i.e.,, more people came to live there until you had six hundred thousand people], you can make a single Eiruv for the whole town (like you were allowed to until now). [Rashi: we must say that the streets are not sixteen Amos wide since it would be a true Reshus Harabim and you can't make an Eiruv there.] However, if it was originally a public city, and it lost population and became a city of individuals, you can't make an Eiruv with the whole city since it might revert to its previous status (of being a public city). Therefore, R' Yehuda says that you need to leave out fifty residents from the Eiruv, and R' Shimon says that you only need to leave out three courtyards that have two houses apiece.

31) All city of individuals that become public are permitted, even if they don't usually have that many people in there regularly to remind each other that the Heter is because it was originally a city of individuals.

32) You can't make an Eiruv for half the city, but, either you make the Eiruv for the whole city, or you make an Eiruv for each individual alleyway.

33) The first version of R' Pappa is: we only say that you can't make an Eiruv for half the town if you split the city to its length. Since they both need the big street that goes down the length in middle of town, there is no way to divide it. However, you can make an Eiruv for half a city if you split it in its width. You can split the street in half, and each half can use the street on their side. This would be true even according to R' Akiva who holds that an inner courtyard that goes to the street through an outer courtyard, even if the inner one made an Eiruv for itself, since they have the right to walk through the outer one, they forbid the outer one unless they make an EIruv together. After all, that's only because they have the right to pass by the courtyard to get out, but here, everybody doesn't need to use the other side of the street, but they will exit the city from their half of the street.

34) The second version of R' Pappa, you can't even split the city to its width. this is even according to the Rabanan who argue with R' Akiva and say that the inner courtyard doesn't make the outer courtyard forbidden, that's because they can set up a 'Daka' in front of their courtyard. (We'll explain Daka later). [Rashi explains: by doing so, they stop their passing through the outer courtyard. Tosfos says that it doesn't stop them from passing through, but that they can't do anything else there. (i.e. that you just pass through fast and get out).] However, here, how can one side of the town shut down the street to the townspeople of the other side? [Tosfos explains: since they're equally owned, you can't shut one of them out, even if you put a Daka, or even a full Mechitza. This is not like Rashi who differentiates that a street doesn't have any barrier separating it like the alleyway has a Daka .]

35) This, that we allow making an Eiruv for each individual alleyway even though they all used to making an Eiruv together (therefore, it's considered missing some of the people in the Eiruv if they don't make an Eiruv together as they usually do); since each one sets up a Daka at the opening of their alleyway. [Rashi explains a Daka: it's a small opening (with two short sides and a low lintel. Tosfos brings Rashi later that explains it as a four Tefchim high wall.]

36) [Tosfos says: Daka only helps when the main use is for the people of this area, but just others have a right to pass through, like an outer courtyard, or an alleyway. However, we said that a Daka doesn't help to split the street in half since the street is equally owned by all residents.]

37) If the public city only has one opening to the outside (i.e., that it's completely surrounded on the three other sides), you can make an Eiruv for the whole city without leaving out any part of the city.

38) A ladder has the status of an opening when it's a leniency , and it has a status of not being an opening, and doesn't break the status of the Mechitza that it's leaning on when that's a leniency. Therefore if the city has one opening, and on the other side where there is a wall, there are ladders on both sides of the wall, we say that it's not a city open on both sides and you can make an Eiruv without leaving any place over (since it's a leniency to consider it a wall). The same applies if you have the wall between courtyards lined with ladders that extend for more than ten Amos, we don't say it's considered to be a breach in the wall that's more than ten Amos that the two courtyards can't make their own Eiruv, but we consider it as if the wall is still there separating them for this leniency. However, we do consider ladders by that wall as an opening for the leniency that we allow them to make an Eiruv together if they want to, and we don't say that there is no connection between courtyards and each one needs their own Eiruv.

39) If you have a ladder from a courtyard to a porch, if that porch is ten Tefachim above the courtyard, we consider it as being not connected to the porch when it's a leniency that, even if they're used to making an Eiruv together, we don't forbid if they didn't make an Eiruv together that Shabbos, and the porch doesn't need to put up a Daka to show that they remove themselves from the courtyard. However, if the porch is not ten high (but has a wall on each side of the opening where the ladder is so that it wouldn't be completely open to the courtyard), you can only permit if the porch puts up a Daka.

Daf 60

40) By a public city, (where you need to leave some area out of the Eiruv), you may leave out an area that's cut off from the rest of the city with walls and you can't make an Eiruv with it if you wanted to, or even if it's not a place where people live.

41) According to R' Yehuda who requires to leave over fifty residents from the Eiruv; there is an argument between R' Yehuda (the Amorah) and R' Huna whether you need to leave over residents if the city only consists of fifty residents.

42) Rav says that the Halacha is like R' Shimon (that you only need to leave over three courtyards with two houses apiece). R' Yitzchok says that even one courtyard with one house could be left over. The Gemara has an inquiry whether this was a tradition that he had [Tosfos: from some Tanna] or was it his own logic [what he would have said, but he doesn't have any Tannaic backing. However, it doesn't have anything to do with the Halacha, since we already Paskined like R' Shimon.]

43) If you're in the east (not in your house), and you ask your son to make an Eiruv to the west, or vice versa; if you're within two thousand Amos of your house, but not of the Eiruv, you're permitted to walk to your house, but not to your Eiruv. (I.e., your house is your Shabbos headquarters, and not your Eiruv). However, if you're within two thousand Amos of your Eiruv, but not of your house, you're permitted to walk to your Eiruv, but not to your house.

44) If you place your Eiruv within the outskirts of the city (the first seventy and two-third Amos), you haven't done anything (since it's all considered as one four-Amos area with the city, which you anyhow had before the Eiruv). [Tosfos explains: even according to R' Eliezer who says that you have two Amos around you, and you put it at the end of the outskirts, we don't say that you have an extra two Amos outside the outskirts. After all, when you put an Eiruv inside a Mechitza, even if it's at the end of the Mechitza, we don't say that you have an extra two Amos outside the Mechitza, but you just have the whole Mechitza because that is now defined as your four Amos. This also applies to the city and its outskirts that also has the status as being four Amos.]

45) However, if you place the Eiruv one Amah out of the outskirts, what you gain on that side, you lose from the other side. (However, you don't lose the whole length of the city since we still consider it as four Amos.) [Tosfos explains: this is only according to R' Eliezer and R' Yehuda who says that you only get four Amos. However, according to the Rabanan who say that you have four Amos in all directions, i.e., you have eight Amos, you gain an extra four Amos.

Even according to the side that, if someone places an Eiruv, he doesn't get with it four surrounding Amos, he still doesn't lose anything, since we'll also consider the city, in this case, as if it doesn't take up any space. After all, we say that, if someone puts an Eiruv in a city, he has two thousand Amos outside the city (and, if we would need to count the city as four Amos, we would need to subtract four Amos and only give him one thousand nine hundred and ninety six Amos).]

46) R' Yehoshua b. Levi says: that, which we consider the whole city like four Amos, (that we say that, when you place the Eiruv outside the outskirts, you don't lose but the amount you moved it out, and not the whole length of the city), is only when you measured and the city is completely within your two thousand Amos. However, if the measurement ended in middle of the city, you only have two thousand Amos from your Eiruv and you can only walk through half the city.

47) [Rashi explains:] R' Idi was bewildered by this differentiation and claimed that it's only words of a prophet (that comes up with unprecedented sayings, i.e., this Halacha seems made up.) [Tosfos explains: that he was praising him saying that it's as if it came straight from Hashem informing his prophets. After all, since R' Yehoshua b. Levi said this to reconcile conflicting Tannaic statements, we can only answer with the above distinction, so R' Idi can't argue. However, Mahari answers Rashi: R' Idi can reconcile that the Mishna only considers the city like four Amos if he sleeps in the city. In that case, we consider the city as four Amos even if the two thousand Amos ends halfway through the city. (However, in the case that the city is not fully in the T'chum, then you only need to subtract four Amos from the two thousand Amos for the city, but if it ends in the middle of the city then you can't leave the other side of the city.) However if he sleeps outside the city, where you want to say that, if the two thousand Amos ends in the middle of the city, the city is not considered four Amos, if so, we shouldn't consider it as four Amos either if the whole city is within the two thousand Amos. Therefore, you will only count two thousand Amos even if the city is completely within those two thousand Amos.]

48) Everyone agrees, if you put your Eiruv in the city, then you have two thousand Amos in all directions, and the city is considered as four Amos.

Daf 61

49) If you have a city that's located on the edge of a cliff; if it has a barrier before the cliff that's four Amos high, then you can count your T'chum from the edge of the city. However, if there is no barrier, since it's scary to use the area of the city since one may fall, we don't consider it as an established city and it's like a tent city and you only get two thousand Amos from the door of your house. Although usually we say that Dakos, barriers, are four Tefachim tall, here we need them larger to make it no longer scary to walk there.

50) They Paskined that the people of Geder could visit Chamson on Shabbos, but not the other way around, Although they're the same distance from each other, the reason why the people of Geder can walk more since they both were on the cliff's edge, and only the city of Geder made a barrier. So they count their T'chum from the edge of the city, and Chamson counted from their front door.

51) Another possibility is that Geder was a large city and Chomson was small, so Chomson was completely within the T'chum of Geder, but Geder wasn't completely in the T'chum of Chomson. Alternatively, we refer to a case where Geder was shaped like a bow, [Tosfos explains that there less than four thousand Amos between the ends of the bow and they start their T'chum from the the empty space where you would draw the imaginary string for the bow. Chomson can only reach the beginning of the ends of the bow. Alternatively, it's a small town in the middle and could only reach the empty space where you would draw the imaginary string for the bow, but not to the ends. This is not like Rashi's explanation.]

52) The Chachumim say; if you put an Eiruv in a city, you can walk the whole city and two thousand Amos outside of it. R' Akiva says that you only have two thousand Amos from your Eiruv (and we don't count the city to be only four Amos). Shmuel says that the Rabanan would agree that if you put it in a uninhabited city, that you only have two thousand Amos from your Eiruv. (However, if you were personally in the ghost town, you can consider it as four Amos.) R' Elazar says that the Rabanan would still argue that you have the whole city and two thousand Amos around it. Although you don't have people living there, but it's fit to have people living there.

53) You don't need to worry to keep R' Akiva's opinion since the Halacha is like the more lenient opinion by Eiruv [Tosfos: since it's only rabbinically obligated.]