Commentary for Eruvin 39:10
ולאו אתמר עלה אמר ר"נ לא שנו אלא לזרוק אבל לטלטל לא
where] the water dried up on the Sabbath?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Is movement permitted because the enclosure was a private domain when the Sabbath began, or is it forbidden because the permissibility of the imperfect enclosure was solely due to the existence of the water in the well which is now no longer available?');"><sup>19</sup></span> The other replied: [The enclosure] was recognized<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'made'.');"><sup>20</sup></span> [as a valid] partition only on account of the water, [and since] no water is here available, there is here no [validity] in the partition either.
Explore commentary for Eruvin 39:10. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.