An unexpected outcome TB Eiruvin 16

Everybody agrees when the actual wall standing is greater than breaches in the wall (עוֹמֵד יָתֵר עַל הַפִּירְצָה) one still has a halakhically viable wall. Everybody also agrees when the breaches in the wall is greater than the actual wall (פִּירְצוֹת יְתֵרוֹת עַל עוֹמֵד) one does not have a halakhically viable wall. Of course, there’s a disagreement when the wall is equal to the breach (פָּרוּץ כְּעוֹמֵד) beginning on yesterday’s daf TB Eiruvin 15b. “It is stated that the amora’im disagree about the case where the breached segment of the partition equals the standing portion. Rav Pappa said: It is permitted to carry within that enclosure. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: It is prohibited.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara brings case after case to see who is correct; however, only to conclude that each side can interpret the case according to his opinion until the very last case is analyzed. “The Gemara returns to the dispute with regard to a breach equal to the standing segments of a partition and cites another proof. Come and hear that which was taught in the following baraita: With regard to an area enclosed by these walls, in a case where most of them consist of entrance and windows, it is permitted to carry on Shabbat within the area, provided that the standing segments are greater than the breached segments.

“The Gemara analyzes the formulation of the baraita: Can it enter your mind that the baraita is referring to a case where most of the walls are entrances and windows? If so, the standing segments are certainly not greater than the breached segments. Rather, emend the baraita as follows: Carrying in the area enclosed by these walls, to which one added many entrances and windows, is permitted, provided that the standing segments are greater than the breached segments. The Gemara draws an inference: If the standing segments equal the breached segments, carrying is prohibited in that enclosure. This is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Pappa” (Sefaria.org translation)

You would think this would end the debate, but you would be wrong. “Nevertheless, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Pappa. The Gemara wonders: A conclusive refutation and the halakha? The Gemara answers: Yes, that is the case, because the precise reading of the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Pappa. As we learned in the mishna the following phrase: Provided…there will not be breaches in the partition greater than the built segment. This is clearly indicating that if the breached segments are equal to the built segments, carrying is permitted, as maintained by Rav Pappa.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rav Pappa’s position is the halakha codified in the Shulkhan Arukh, Orekh Hayyim 362: 9)

 Tosafot notices a discrepancy in the  halakha when it comes to ritual slaughtering. A shokhet, a ritual slaughter, needs to cut the esophagus and windpipe in one smooth action for the animal to be kosher. If he cuts most of the esophagus and windpipe, the animal is kosher. If he cuts 49% or less of the esophagus and windpipe, the animal is treif. The animal is treif if the shokhet cuts exactly 50% of the esophagus and windpipe. They conclude that the difference between our Gemara concerning walls and the Gemara in Hullin, the tractate the deals with kashrut, is due to prohibition and ritual impurity (איסור וטומאה) when it comes to the slaughtering of animals.