A CHATZER THAT ENTERS BETWEEN THE PASIM
Question (Abaye): If one end of a Chatzer enters between the Pasim, may one carry from the Chatzer to between the Pasim, or vice-versa?
Answer (Rabah): It is permitted. (The Isur to transfer between Chatzeros without an Eruv is only because they belong to different people.)
Question (Abaye): If two Chatzeros [with a Mechitzah between them enter between the Pasim, may one carry between them and between the Pasim]?
Answer #1 (Rabah): It is forbidden.
Answer #2 (Rav Huna): It is forbidden, even if they were Me'arev. This is a decree lest people think that an Eruv between the Pasim is valid [as if it were placed in a Mavoy].
(Rava): If they were Me'arev, it is permitted.
Support (Abaye, for Rava - Beraisa): If one end of a Chatzer enters between the Pasim, one may transfer between the Chatzer and between the Pasim;
If two [Chatzeros with a Mechitzah between them enter between the Pasim], they are forbidden.
This is if they were not Me'arev. If they were Me'arev it is permitted.
Suggestion: This refutes Rav Huna!
Rejection: The case is, the Chatzeros later joined (Rashi - the end of the wall between them was breached, now they look like one Reshus; Tosfos - and now they were Me'arev together).
IF THE PUBLIC PASS THROUGH THE PASIM
Question (Abaye): If the water dried up on Shabbos, do the Pasei Bira'os still permit?
Answer (Rabah): Pasei Bira'os are only for the sake of water. It there is no water, they do not permit carrying.
Question (Ravin): If the water dried up on Shabbos, then water came on Shabbos, what is the law? (Rashi. Ritva - he asks two questions. 1) If the water dried up on Shabbos. 2) If it was dry before Shabbos and water came on Shabbos.)
Abaye: You need not ask about when the water dried up. I already asked, and Rabah forbade;
Also, you need not ask about if water came on Shabbos. This is like a Mechitzah made on Shabbos. Whether it was made b'Shogeg or b'Mezid, it is considered a Mechitzah.
Question: Rav Nachman taught that they are Mechitzos only regarding throwing (to obligate one who throws to there from Reshus ha'Rabim, for mid'Oraisa they are Mechitzos), but they do not permit carrying inside!
Answer: He refers only to Mezid (this is a fine. All the more so, it does not apply here, for the water came by itself.)
(R. Elazar): If one threw [from Reshus ha'Rabim] to between Pasei Bira'os, he is liable.
Question: This is obvious. If they were not proper Machitzos, they would not permit carrying!
Answer: The case is, he made Pasim like Pasei Bira'os [but without a well inside] in a Reshus ha'Rabim.
Question: Also this is obvious. If they were not Machitzos in general [even without a well], surely they would not permit carrying around a well!
Answer: The Chidush is, even though Rabim pass through them [inside is Reshus ha'Yachid].
Question: He need not teach that Rabim do not Mevatel Machitzos. He already taught this!
(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): If Reshus ha'Rabim passes through the Pasim, it must be diverted;
Chachamim say, there is no need for this.
(R. Yochanan and R. Elazar): This teaches the strength of Mechitzos (Rabim do not Mevatel them)!
Answer: One might have thought that R. Yochanan and R. Elazar say that Chachamim's opinion teaches the strength of Mechitzos, but they themselves hold like R. Yehudah;
R. Elazar teaches here that one who threw between Pasei Bira'os is liable. This shows that he holds like Chachamim.
Question: It would have sufficed to teach that one who threw between Pasei Bira'os is liable!
Answer: Indeed, he said only one of these explicitly. The other was inferred from it. (Rashba - he was explicitly Mechayev one who throws. Maharshal - he explicitly said 'this teaches the strength...' We assume that he agrees, unless there is a clear indication otherwise, like there is for R. Yochanan (22a).)
HOW MUCH OF THE ANIMAL MUST BE INSIDE?
(Mishnah): The Pasim may be as close...
(Mishnah): One may not stand in Reshus ha'Yachid and [stick his mouth out and] drink in Reshus ha'Rabim, or vice-versa (lest he bring the cup into the Reshus in which he stands, for which he would be liable), unless Rosho v'Rubo are in the same Reshus that he drinks from;
The same applies to a winepress. (Abaye - one who stands in Reshus ha'Rabim may not drink from a winepress (a Karmelis) unless he enters Rosho v'Rubo. Rava - if he enters Rosho v'Rubo, he may drink without tithing [haphazardly], before the wine descends to the pit. We are not concerned lest he take the wine outside, which would obligate tithing it.)
Version #1 - Question: For people, we require Rosho v'Rubo. Is this required for a cow?
Surely this is required if one holds a Kli [from which the cow drinks] but does not hold the cow (perhaps it will bend its head outside, and he will bring the Kli to its head);
We ask about one who he holds a Kli and holds the cow [by the halter].
Answer (Mishnah): ...On condition that a cow can enter Rosho v'Rubo and drink. (The Gemara did not say who asked or answered the question.)
Suggestion: The case is, he holds a Kli and holds the cow!
Rejection: No, he holds it, but does not hold the cow.
Question: This is not permitted!
(Beraisa): On Shabbos, one may not fill [a Kli] with water and hold it in front of his animal;
He may fill [a Kli] and pour it for his animal to drink by itself.
Answer: Abaye explained, that that refers to a feeding trough four wide and 10 tall in a Reshus ha'Rabim, and one end enters between the Pasim. We decree, lest he will see a need to fix the trough [in a way permitted on Shabbos] and go to fix it, and carry the bucket with him from Reshus ha'Yachid to Reshus ha'Rabim (Tosfos).
Objection: One would not be liable in such a case!
(Rav Safra citing R. Yochanan): If one moved objects from one corner to another, and later reconsidered and took them out, he is exempt, since his initial intention was not to take them out.
Correction: Rather, we decree lest he fix the trough, and carry the bucket back from Reshus ha'Rabim to Reshus ha'Yachid.
HOW MUCH OF THE ANIMAL MUST BE INSIDE? (cont.)
Version #2 - Question: For people, Rosho v'Rubo suffices. Does this suffice for a cow?
Surely it suffices if he holds a Kli and the cow. We ask about one who holds a Kli but not the cow.
Answer #1 (Mishnah): ...On condition that a cow can enter Rosho v'Rubo and drink.
Suggestion: The case is, he holds a Kli, but not the cow!
Rejection: No, he holds also the cow.
Support: One may not hold just the Kli!
(Beraisa): On Shabbos, one may not fill [a Kli] with water and put it in front of his animal;
He may fill [a Kli] and pour it for his animal to drink by itself.
Rejection: Abaye explained, that that refers to a feeding trough four wide and 10 tall in a Reshus ha'Rabim, and one end enters between the Pasim. We decree lest he go to fix the trough, and carry the bucket from Reshus ha'Yachid to Reshus ha'Rabim.
Objection: One would not be liable in such a case!
(Rav Safra citing R. Yochanan): If one moved objects from one corner to another, and later reconsidered and took them out, he is exempt, since his initial intention was not to take them out.
Correction: Rather, we decree lest he fix the trough and carry the bucket back from Reshus ha'Rabim to Reshus ha'Yachid. (end of Version #2. The next answers are according to Version #1.)
Answer #2 (Beraisa #1): If Rosho v'Rubo of a camel are inside [the Pasim], one may be Oves (force feed) it.
Surely, the case is that he holds a Kli and the camel, yet Rosho v'Rubo is required!
Rejection (Rav Acha bar Rav Huna): A camel is different, for its neck is long. (Even if one holds most of the body inside, it could stick its head outside. Therefore we require also the head to be inside.)
Answer #3 (Beraisa #2): If Rosho v'Rubo of an animal are inside, one may be Oves it.
Surely, he holds a Kli and the animal, yet Rosho v'Rubo is required!
Rejection: This discusses a camel.
Question: Beraisa #1 already taught about a camel! (Surely, Beraisa #2 discusses other animals.)
Answer: The Beraisos were not taught together. (It is plausible that both discuss camels.)
Support (Beraisa - R. Eliezer): A camel is forbidden [if Rosho v'Rubo are not inside] because its neck is long. (This shows that we are more lenient about other animals.)
(R. Yitzchak bar Ada): Pasei Bira'os were permitted only for Olei Regalim (people coming to Yerushalayim for the festival).
Question (Beraisa): Pasei Bira'os permit [drawing water] only for animals.
Answer: It means (some texts - R. Yitzchak means), they permit only for animals of Olei Regalim, but not for people (even Olei Regalim), for a person can climb down into the well (he spreads his limbs from one side to the other) to drink, and climb out. (Even according to our text, R. Yitzchak discussed animals of Olei Regalim.)