Observation: The Gemara could have said that they are like figs and raisins set out to dry, as stated earlier (45b).

Explanation: This is like a prohibition that a person pushes aside from moving on Shabbos, like a candle that he lit before the onset of that Shabbos, as I explained at the end of the first chapter.

Text: Rabeinu Chananel does not have this text in Nedarim. This implies that he does not rule this way, as the Gemara in Kesuvos (76b) indeed says that we do not rule like this pair.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that there was a small pathway between two houses, and the cracked barrel was placed from the top of one of the houses to the other. A dead person was in the alleyway under the barrel opposite the crack of the barrel. They tied a string to the pottery (that was a Tefach wide) to know if the crack was indeed the size of a Tefach.

Question #1: The Ri has difficulty with this explanation. Even if the crack was not the size of a Tefach, since the dead person is opposite it, it is still not considered to make an Ohel over the dead person. This is because it is not the normal way of making an Ohel, as stated in Ohalos (10:5).

Question #1 (cont.): In Sukah (18a), the Gemara says that if there is not an opening the size of a Tefach in the skylight and a dead person is in the house, whatever is in the house opposite the skylight is pure. If the dead person is opposite the skylight, whatever is in the house is pure. Accordingly, if the dead person is opposite the crack, why did they have to tie the pottery (to measure)?

Question #2: Rashi also explains that they stopped up the window before the person died.

Question #2 (cont.): Rebbi does not understand Rashi's explanation. This dead person was clearly not whole, as they did not know if above him there was an opening of a Tefach and the dead person was totally underneath the crack. Rather, it is clear the question was regarding a Kzayis of a dead body. If so, Rashi should not have stated that the case took place before the person died, but rather before the Kzayis of the dead person arrived!

Answer: However, it is possible to say that the dead person was totally underneath the barrel in a way where he was not opposite the crack of the barrel. The barrel had a crack down the middle from one side to the other. If there was a Tefach all the way through the crack, the impurity would not pass through as it would not be considered one tent. However, if there was not a Tefach it is like there is no crack, and it is considered one tent to cause the impurity to go to the house next door.

Observation: In any event, the first question is still applicable.

Explanation #2: It appears that the correct explanation is that of Rabeinu Chananel who says that a Hilkit is in fact a large mound of earth. This mound of earth was between the two houses, and the dead person was in one of the houses. The barrel was on top of the mound and reached the ceiling (of both houses, meaning it was lying across the mound), and it was not impure as it was designated to be there. If it would not have a crack, the second house would not be impure. However, the barrel had a crack in its side.

Proof: It is understandable why it is called "cracked," because the crack is on its side. However, according to Rashi this is not understandable, as if the crack is on top of the barrel it should say the barrel is "open," not cracked.

Explanation #2 (cont.): However, according to Rabeinu Chananel this is understandable, as the crack is on the side. They tied the pottery to know if there was an opening of a Tefach. It must be that this hole in the barrel was used, as such a hole is indeed measured by whether or not it is a Tefach. If it was a Tefach, the second house would be impure. If not, it is pure.

Question: However, there is a difficulty that the Ri has with the explanation of Rabeinu Chananel. It should not have said "on them" (according to Rashi this refers to the two houses) but rather "on it" (according to the Ri this refers to the mound).

Explanation: This means a bathtub. This is also the explanation of the Aruch.

Observation: We do not require stopping up to be done for the purpose of a Mitzvah, as I explained earlier (126b). We only require this regarding measuring of a Mitzvah.