מְטַפֵּס וְעוֹלֶה מְטַפֵּס וְיוֹרֵד.
must climb up and climb down into the well, and drink there.
אִינִי? וְהָאָמַר רַב יִצְחָק אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא הוּתְּרוּ פַּסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת אֶלָּא לִבְאֵר מַיִם חַיִּים בִּלְבַד. וְאִי לִבְהֵמָה, מָה לִי חַיִּים מָה לִי מְכוּנָּסִין? בָּעִינַן מִידֵּי דַּחֲזֵי לְאָדָם.
The Gemara raises a difficulty: Is that so? Is the allowance of upright boards for animals alone? Didn’t Rav Yitzḥak say that Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Upright boards surrounding wells were permitted only where the wells contain potable, running spring water? If the allowance is only for animals, what is the difference to me if it is spring water and what is the difference to me if it is collected water? Granted, collected water is inferior to spring water, but it is still suitable for animals to drink. The Gemara answers: We require something that is fit for humans.
גּוּפָא: לֹא הוּתְּרוּ פַּסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת אֶלָּא לִבְהֵמָה בִּלְבַד, אֲבָל אָדָם מְטַפֵּס וְעוֹלֶה מְטַפֵּס וְיוֹרֵד. וְאִם הָיוּ רְחָבִין, אֲפִילּוּ לְאָדָם נָמֵי. וְלֹא יְמַלֵּא אָדָם מַיִם וְיִתֵּן לִפְנֵי בְהֶמְתּוֹ, אֲבָל מְמַלֵּא הוּא וְשׁוֹפֵךְ לִפְנֵי בְּהֵמָה וְשׁוֹתָה מֵאֵילֶיהָ.
The Gemara examines the baraita cited in the course of the previous discussion. Returning to the matter itself, the statement quoted above: Upright boards surrounding wells were permitted only for cattle, but a person must climb up and climb down into the well and drink there. But if the wells were too wide for him to climb, they are permitted for a person as well. A person may not fill a bucket with water and hold it before his animal on Shabbat, but he may fill it and pour it out into a trough, and the animal drinks of its own accord.
מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב עָנָן: אִם כֵּן, מָה הוֹעִילוּ פַּסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת? מָה הוֹעִילוּ?! לְמַלּאוֹת מֵהֶן!
Rav Anan strongly objects to this explanation: If so, what purpose do the boards surrounding a well serve? The Gemara immediately expresses its surprise: How can he ask what purpose do they serve? They allow people to draw water from the wells, which would otherwise be prohibited.
אֶלָּא: מָה הוֹעִיל רֹאשָׁהּ וְרוּבָּהּ שֶׁל פָּרָה?
Rather, Rav Anan’s question should be understood as follows: What purpose is served in requiring that the enclosed area be large enough for the cow’s head and most of its body, if in any case the cow may not be given to drink straight from the bucket?
אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן — בְּאֵיבוּס הָעוֹמֵד בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים גָּבוֹהַּ עֲשָׂרָה וְרוֹחַב אַרְבָּעָה וְרֹאשׁוֹ נִכְנָס לְבֵין הַפַּסִּין וְכוּ׳.
Abaye said: In fact, it is permitted to give the animal to drink in any manner in the area enclosed by the boards surrounding the well. With what are we dealing here? We are dealing with a special case, with a manger or trough that stands in the public domain, and is ten handbreadths high and four handbreadths wide, i.e., it constitutes a private domain, and one end of it interposes into the area between the upright boards surrounding a well. In such a case, the Sages prohibited one to fill a bucket with water in the area enclosed by the upright boards and hold it before his animal; they were concerned that the manger might become damaged, and one might come to carry the bucket from the private domain into the public domain or vice versa while fixing the damaged manger.
אָמַר רַב יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַב: אֵין בּוּרְגָּנִין בְּבָבֶל, וְלֹא פַּסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת בְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ.
It is prohibited to walk more than two thousand cubits from a city on Shabbat. However, if there are small watchmen’s huts [burganin] outside the city that are relatively close together, they are considered part of the city, and consequently the two thousand cubit limit is measured from the last such hut. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said that Rav said: The law with regard to these huts [burganin] does not apply in Babylonia, nor does the allowance with regard to upright boards surrounding a well apply outside of Eretz Yisrael.
בּוּרְגָּנִין בְּבָבֶל לָא — דִּשְׁכִיחִי בִּידְקֵי, פַּסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת בְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ לָא — דְּלָא שְׁכִיחִי מְתִיבָתָא. אֲבָל אִיפְּכָא עָבְדִינַן.
The Gemara explains: The law with regard to huts does not apply in Babylonia because floods are common there; and since the huts are liable to be swept away by the floodwaters, they are not regarded as dwellings. The allowance with regard to upright boards surrounding a well does not apply outside of Eretz Yisrael, because yeshivot are not common there, and the allowance was only granted to those traveling for the sake of a mitzva such as Torah study. But we do say the opposite, i.e., we apply the law of huts outside of Eretz Yisrael and we apply the allowance of upright boards surrounding a well in Babylonia.
אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַב: אֵין בּוּרְגָּנִין וּפַסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת, לֹא בְּבָבֶל וְלֹא בַּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ. בּוּרְגָּנִין בְּבָבֶל לֹא — דִּשְׁכִיחִי בִּידְקֵי, בְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ נָמֵי לָא — דִּשְׁכִיחִי גַּנָּבֵי.
The Gemara cites an alternative version of the previous discussion. Some say that Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said that Rav said: The laws with regard to huts and upright boards surrounding a well apply neither in Babylonia specifically, nor outside of Eretz Yisrael generally. The Gemara explains: The law with regard to huts does not apply in Babylonia, because floods are common there. It also does not apply outside of Eretz Yisrael, because thieves who steal from such huts are common there; therefore, people do not regard the huts as dwellings.
פַּסֵּי בֵירָאוֹת בְּבָבֶל לָא — דִּשְׁכִיחִי מַיָּא. בְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ נָמֵי לָא — דְּלָא שְׁכִיחִי מְתִיבָתָא.
The allowance with regard to upright boards surrounding a well does not apply in Babylonia, because water is common there. Babylonia has many rivers and canals, and therefore wells are not essential there. Outside of Eretz Yisrael in general it also does not apply, because yeshivot are not common there.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב חִסְדָּא לְמָרִי בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא: אָמְרִי אָתֵיתוּ מִבַּרְנִשׁ לְבֵי כְנִישְׁתָּא דְּדָנִיֵּאל דַּהֲוָה תְּלָתָא פַּרְסֵי בְּשַׁבְּתָא, אַמַּאי סָמְכִיתוּ — אַבּוּרְגָּנִין? הָא אָמַר אֲבוּהּ דַּאֲבוּהּ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב: אֵין בּוּרְגָּנִין בְּבָבֶל!
Rav Ḥisda said to Marei, son of Rav Huna, son of Rav Yirmeya bar Abba: People say that you walk from the city of Barnish to Daniel’s synagogue, which is a distance of three parasangs [parsei], on Shabbat. Upon what do you rely? Do you rely on the huts located at the city’s outskirts that extend the Shabbat boundary toward the synagogue? Didn’t your father’s father say in the name of Rav: The law of huts does not apply in Babylonia?
נָפֵק וְאַחְוִי לֵיהּ הָנְהוּ מָתָווֹתָא, דְּמִבַּלְעָן בְּשִׁבְעִים אַמָּה וְשִׁירַיִים.
Marei then went out and showed Rav Ḥisda certain ruins of towns that were subsumed within a distance of seventy cubits and a remainder, two-thirds of a cubit, of each other. He relied upon the ruins, rather than upon the huts, to be permitted to walk the entire distance from Barnish to Daniel’s synagogue.
אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא, דָּרֵישׁ מָרִי בַּר מָר: מַאי דִּכְתִיב ״לְכׇל תִּכְלָה רָאִיתִי קֵץ רְחָבָה מִצְוָתְךָ מְאֹד״, דָּבָר זֶה אֲמָרוֹ דָּוִד וְלֹא פֵּירְשׁוֹ, אֲמָרוֹ אִיּוֹב וְלֹא פֵּירְשׁוֹ, אֲמָרוֹ יְחֶזְקֵאל וְלֹא פֵּירְשׁוֹ, עַד שֶׁבָּא זְכַרְיָה בֶּן עִדּוֹ וּפֵירְשׁוֹ.
Rav Ḥisda said: Mari bar Mar interpreted homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “I have seen a limit to every purpose; but Your commandment is exceedingly broad” (Psalms 119:96)? This idea with regard to the breadth of the Torah was stated by David, but he did not explain it; it was stated by Job, but he too did not explain it; it was stated by Ezekiel, but he also did not explain it, until Zechariah, son of Berechiah, son of Iddo, came and explained it.
אֲמָרוֹ דָּוִד וְלֹא פֵּירְשׁוֹ, דִּכְתִיב: ״לְכׇל תִּכְלָה רָאִיתִי קֵץ רְחָבָה מִצְוָתְךָ מְאֹד״. אֲמָרוֹ אִיּוֹב וְלֹא פֵּירְשׁוֹ, דִּכְתִיב: ״אֲרוּכָּה מֵאֶרֶץ מִדָּהּ וּרְחָבָה מִנִּי יָם״.
Rav Ḥisda explains: This idea was stated by David, but he did not explain it, as it is written: “I have seen a limit to every purpose; but Your commandment is exceedingly broad,” i.e., he stated that the Torah is exceedingly broad, but he did not explain how broad. And likewise this idea was stated by Job, but he too did not explain it, as it is written: “Its measure is longer than the earth and broader than the sea” (Job 11:9).
אֲמָרוֹ יְחֶזְקֵאל וְלֹא פֵּירְשׁוֹ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּפְרֹשׂ אוֹתָהּ לְפָנַי וְהִיא כְתוּבָה פָּנִים וְאָחוֹר וְכָתוּב אֵלֶיהָ קִינִים וָהֶגֶה וָהִי״.
And similarly, it was stated by Ezekiel, but he also did not explain it, as it is written: “And He spread it,” the scroll, “before me, and it was written inside and outside; and in it was written lamentations, and melody [hegeh], and woe [vahi]” (Ezekiel 2:10).
״קִינִים״ — זוֹ פּוּרְעָנוּתָן שֶׁל צַדִּיקִים בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״קִינָה הִיא וְקוֹנְנוּהָ״. ״וָהֶגֶה״ — זוֹ מַתַּן שְׂכָרָן שֶׁל צַדִּיקִים לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״עֲלֵי הִגָּיוֹן בְּכִנּוֹר״. ״וָהִי״ — זוֹ הִיא פּוּרְעָנוּתָן שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״הֹוָה עַל הֹוָה תָּבֹא״.
The Gemara explains: “Lamentations,” this refers to the punishment of the righteous in this world, and so it is stated: “It is a lamentation and they shall make lament with it” (Ezekiel 32:16). “And melody [hegeh],” this refers to the reward of the righteous in the World-to-Come, and the proof that this word is an expression of joy is the verse that states: “Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the harp, to the melody [higayon] of a lyre” (Psalms 92:4). And “woe [vahi],” this is the punishment of the wicked in the World-to-Come, and so it states: “Calamity [hova] shall follow upon calamity” (Ezekiel 7:26).
עַד שֶׁבָּא זְכַרְיָה בֶּן עִדּוֹ וּפֵירְשׁוֹ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי מָה אַתָּה רוֹאֶה וָאוֹמַר אֲנִי רוֹאֶה מְגִילָּה עָפָה אׇרְכָּהּ עֶשְׂרִים בָּאַמָּה וְרׇחְבָּהּ עֶשֶׂר בָּאַמָּה״. וְכִי פָּשְׁטַתְּ לַהּ, הָוְיָא לַהּ עֶשְׂרִין בְּעֶשְׂרִין. וּכְתִיב: ״הִיא כְתוּבָה פָּנִים וְאָחוֹר״, וְכִי קָלְפַתְּ לַהּ, כַּמָּה הָוְיָא לַהּ — אַרְבְּעִין בְּעֶשְׂרִין.
But nonetheless, Ezekiel did not explain the extent of the Torah, until Zechariah, son of Berechiah, son of Iddo, came and explained it, as it is written: “And he said to me: What do you see? And I said: I see a flying [afa] scroll; the length of it is twenty cubits, and the breadth of it is ten cubits” (Zechariah 5:2). Since the scroll was flying, the implication is that it had two equal sides, so that when you open it, it is twenty by twenty cubits. And it is written: “And it was written inside and outside,” i.e., on both sides. And when you peel them apart and separate the two sides, how much is it? Its entire area amounts to forty by twenty cubits, or eight hundred of God’s cubits.
וּכְתִיב: ״מִי מָדַד בְּשׇׁעֳלוֹ מַיִם וְשָׁמַיִם בַּזֶּרֶת תִּכֵּן וְגוֹ׳״ — נִמְצָא כׇּל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ אֶחָד מִשְּׁלֹשֶׁת אֲלָפִים וּמָאתַיִם בַּתּוֹרָה.
In order to determine the measure of God’s cubit, the Gemara cites a verse that describes the size of the span between God’s thumb and little finger, in a manner of speaking. And it is written: “Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure” (Isaiah 40:12). If the entire world measures one square span, which is a quarter of one square cubit, we find according to this calculation that the entire world is one part in three thousand and two hundred of the Torah.
וְאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא, דָּרֵישׁ מָרִי בַּר מָר, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִנֵּה שְׁנֵי דּוּדָאֵי תְאֵנִים מוּעָדִים לִפְנֵי הֵיכַל ה׳. הַדּוּד הָאֶחָד תְּאֵנִים טוֹבוֹת מְאֹד כִּתְאֵנֵי
And Rav Ḥisda further said: Mari bar Mar interpreted homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The Lord showed me, and behold two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the Lord, after Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah, son of Jehoiakim, the king of Judah, and the princes of Judah with the craftsmen and the smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon. One basket [dud] had very good figs, like the figs