- A chatzeir that extends into the enclosed area of a well
Abaye asked Rabbah, חצר שראשה נכנס לבין הפסים – If the end of the chatzeir extends into the well area enclosed by the double-posts, what is the law in regard to carrying from within the chatzeir into the area enclosed by the posts, and from the area in between the posts to the chatzeir. Since the chatzeir is owned by its residents and the well area is designated for the use of the people travelling for the regel carrying from one area to the other is perhaps the same as carrying between one person’s property and another person’s property, which is forbidden without making an eiruv chatzeiros. Rabbah answered that it is mutar. Rashi explains that since the pilgrims do not actually reside within the well enclosure, the area is not considered to be owned by them, and therefore carrying into it, or from it, is not considered as carrying from one’s property into someone else’s property.
- If the water dries up and then reappears
Abaye asked Rabbah, יבשו מים בשבת מהו? – What is the law if the well dried up on Shabbos, in terms of permitting one to carry within the posts? Rabbah answered, כלום נעשית מחיצה אלא בשביל מים – Were these posts given the status as ae mechitzah for any other reason than to allow the travelers to draw water? מים אין כאן מחיצה אין כאן – Since the water is not here, the mechitzah is not here, )to permit carrying in the area(.
Ravin asked what the law would be if the water dried up on Shabbos and then returned on the same Shabbos. Abaye answered that there is no question that it is mutar, דהוה ליה מחיצה העשויה בשבת – it is a case of a mechitzah made on Shabbos, and any mechitzah made on Shabbos, בין שוגג בין מזיד בין באונס בין ברצון – whether made inadvertently, or deliberately, by accident or willingly, שמה מחיצה – is regarded as a valid partition.
- Holding the animal within the well area
The Mishnah on Daf 17b stated that it is mutar to bring the pasin closer to the well if there is enough space within the pasin for a cow to stand with its head and most of its body inside the enclosure and drink. The Gemara asks that if one held the animal, may the animal be given to drink even when most of its body is not in the enclosed area?
The Gemara attempts to bring a proof that it is not allowed, from a Baraisa that only allows holding a camel and stuffing food into its mouth when ראשה ורובה מבפנים – its head and most of its body is within the enclosure. This seems to be a clear-cut proof that it is forbidden.
The Gemara rejects this proof because the Baraisa was referring to a camel, which has a long neck, and it can easily pull its head out into a reshus harabim unless the majority of its body is within the enclosure.
