Commentary for Eruvin 40:22

א"ר יצחק בר אדא לא הותרו פסי ביראות אלא לעולי רגלים בלבד והתניא לא הותרו פסי ביראות אלא לגבי בהמה בלבד מאי בהמה בהמת עולי רגלים אבל אדם

Now is not the act of cramming, the same as holding the bucket and the animal,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it is impossible to cram unless one holds the animal's neck.');">²⁹</span> and yet it is required that its head and the greater part of its body [shall be within the private domain].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Would not this then provide a reply to the first enquiry in the first version?');">³⁰</span> R'Aha son of R'Huna replied in the name of R'Shesheth: A camel is different since its neck is long.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the greater part of its body were to remain in the public domain it might, by a turn of its neck, drag its keeper after it and thus cause him to carry the bucket from the private into the public domain. In the case of any other animal, however, whose neck is not so long this need not be provided against and a keeper might well be permitted to hold its bucket though the greater part of its body remained outside the private domain.');">³¹</span> Come and hear: A beast whose head and the greater part of its body is within [a private domain] may be crammed within [that domain]. Is not cramming the same as holding the bucket and the animal,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it is impossible to cram unless one holds the animal's neck.');">²⁹</span> and yet it was required that its head and the greater part of its body [shall be within the private domain].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Would not this then provide a reply to the first enquiry in the first version?');">³⁰</span> [It may be objected] that by the expression of 'beast', also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what (is the meaning of) beast that was taught'.');">³²</span> a camel [was meant]. Were not, however, both camel and beast separately mentioned?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but it was taught beast' etc.');">³³</span> - Were they mentioned in juxtaposition?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They were not. The author of the one Baraitha did not teach the other, and what the one described as camel the other described by the general term of beast.');">³⁴</span> So<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a camel is subject to a law different from that of other beasts.');">³⁵</span> it was also taught: R'Eleazar forbids this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Holding a bucket of water to an animal's mouth in a private domain while its body remains without.');">³⁶</span> in the case of a camel, because its neck is long. R'Isaac B'Adda<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec.: Ammi (Asheri) . ohkdr hkug');">³⁷</span> stated: Strips [of wood] around wells were permitted to festival pilgrims<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' , lit., 'those who go up (to the Temple) to (celebrate) the major festivals'.');">³⁸</span> only. But was it not taught: Strips [of wood] around wells were permitted for cattle only? - By<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what'.');">³⁹</span> cattle [was meant] the cattle of the festival pilgrims, but a human being<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who desires to drink from a well on the Sabbath.');">⁴⁰</span>

Explore commentary for Eruvin 40:22. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.