Study Eruvin folio 79A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
However, if he did not nullify it, no, the house retains the status of a house, although it is filled with hay. Rav Huna said: Who is the tanna who taught tractate Oholot? It is R' Yosei, and the tanna of the Mishnah does not accept his opinion.
The Talmud asks: If that Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of R' Yosei, there is a difficulty, since we heard him say the opposite, as it was taught in the Tosefta that R' Yosei says: In a case where there is a house full of hay and the owner does not intend to remove, it is considered as
Rather, Rav Asi said: Who is the tanna who taught tractate Eiruvin? It is R' Yosei, who does not accept the opinion of the tanna of tractate Oholot.
Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Are you raising a contradiction between the halakhot of ritual impurity and the halakhot of Shabbat? These two areas of halakha cannot be compared. Leave aside the prohibition of Shabbat. With regard to Shabbat, a person nullifies even a pouch full of money. Th
Rav Ashi said: And are you raising a contradiction between the halakha that governs a house and that which governs a ditch? Granted in the case of a ditch, it typically stands to be permanently filled. As there is no doubt that one’s intention is to fill the ditch, the assumption is that anything