Question (Abaye): The same applies even if he was not Shoves within those Mechitzos!

(Mishnah - R. Eliezer): If one went two Amos outside the Techum, he may re-enter. If he went three Amos outside the Techum, he may not re-enter.

Suggestion: This is like R. Eliezer holds elsewhere, that a person is in the middle of the four Amos given to one who left the Techum [without permission];

If he is two Amos outside, he may re-enter because his Techum overlaps his original Techum. This shows that overlap is significant!

Rabah bar bar Chanah (to Abaye): Why do you challenge Rabah from R. Eliezer's opinion? Chachamim argue with him! (They forbid, for they hold that overlap of Techumim is not significant.)

Abaye: Rabah taught that Chachamim forbid only one who left for Reshus. They agree about one who left for a Mitzvah!

Version #1 (Mishnah): Anyone who leaves the Techum to save may return to his place.

Question: This permits returning to his house. The Reisha gives only 2000 Amos [if he left his Techum]!

Answer (Rav Yehudah): The Seifa permits returning with his weapons [but only up to 2000 Amos].

Objection: The question was not difficult at all. Perhaps we are more lenient about one who left to save!

Version #2 (Mishnah): At first they used to say that witnesses [who left the Techum to testify about the new moon] may not leave the Chatzer [in which the witnesses gather]. R. Gamliel enacted to permit them 2000 Amos in every direction [lest they decide not to come again];

Likewise, a midwife who left to help deliver, or one who left to save from troops, a river, a house that caved in or from a fire, is like a resident of the city [to which he came]. He has 2000 Amos in every direction.

Question: Is he only like a resident? Our Mishnah permits anyone one who left to save to return to his place!

Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): Our Mishnah permits returning with his weapons;

(Beraisa): At first, people [who left the Techum to save] used to leave their weapons in the first house outside the wall [when they returned]. Once, the enemy saw [that they left the wall] and pursued them. Everyone rushed to the house in which the weapons were stored. The enemy followed. More people were killed by Yisraelim pushing each other than by the enemy! They enacted then that people may return with their weapons.

Answer #2 (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): If Yisrael won the battle, they may return only 2000 Amos. If the Nochrim won, Yisraelim may return to their original places.

(Rav Yehudah): If Nochrim besieged cities of Yisraelim, we may not take out weapons to fight them or be Mechalel Shabbos;

Support (Beraisa): If Nochrim besieged...

This is if they seek money. If they seek to kill, we may take out weapons and be Mechalel Shabbos.

In a city near the border [of Eretz Yisrael], even if they seek only straw, we may take out weapons and Mechalel Shabbos [lest they conquer it, and it will be a step towards conquering Eretz Yisrael].

(Rav Yosef bar Minyomi): [Many Yisraelim live in a section of Bavel.] Bavel has a border city;

It is Neharda'a.

Question (R. Dostai of Biri): What is the meaning of "Va'Yagidu l'David...Plishtim Nilchamim bi'K'ilah..."?

Answer (Beraisa): Ke'ilah was a border city. The Plishtim came only for straw -- "v'Hemah Shosim Es ha'Garanos".

Question: "Va'Yish'al David ba'Shem... va'Yomer Hash-m El David Lech v'Hikisa va'Plishtim v'Hoshata Es Ke'ilah" - what was David's question?

Suggestion: He asked whether or not it one may fight them [on Shabbos].

Rejection: Shmuel's Beis Din was around! (We ask Chachamim about Halachah, and not the Urim v'Tumim

Answer: He asked whether or not he would win.

Support "V'Hikisa va'Plishtim v'Hoshata Es Ke'ilah".

(Mishnah - R. Meir): If one stopped [text of She'altos - slept] on the road and got up [after dark] and found that he is within the Techum of a city, he may not enter it, for he did not intend for this;

R. Yehudah says, he may enter;

R. Yehudah: A case occurred in which R. Tarfon entered, even though he did not intend for this beforehand.

(Gemara - Beraisa - R. Yehudah): A case occurred in which R. Tarfon was traveling. It got dark, and he lodged outside the city. In the morning, shepherds told him that he is right near the city. He entered and expounded the entire day in the Beis Medrash.

Chachamim: This is no proof. Perhaps he intended from before Shabbos to be Shoves in the city! (Rashi - he knew that he was within 2000 Amos. Tosfos (43b DH Mutarim) does not require this.) Alternatively, perhaps the Beis Medrash was within 2000 Amos of where he lodged!

(Mishnah - R. Yochanan ben Nuri): If one slept on the road and did not realize that (some texts - until) it was dark, he has 2000 Amos in every direction;

Chachamim say, he has only four Amos;

R. Eliezer says, he is in the middle of his four Amos;

R. Yehudah says, he can go four Amos in any direction he wants;

R. Yehudah agrees that once he decided, he cannot retract.

If Reuven and Shimon both have four Amos and they overlap, they may bring food to the common area and eat together, as long as one does not take the other's food outside the common area.

If each of three people have four Amos and the middle one's Amos are covered by the others', he is permitted [to transfer with] each of them. They are permitted with him and forbidden with each other.

R. Shimon says, this is like three Chatzeros [in a row] open to each other and open to Reshus ha'Rabim;

If the outer Chatzeros were Me'arev with the middle Chatzer, it is permitted with them. They are permitted with it, and they are forbidden with each other.

(Gemara - Rava) Question: What is R. Yochanan ben Nuri's reason?

Perhaps he holds that Hefker objects acquire Shevisah. Really, he should have argued about Kelim. The Mishnah teaches the argument about people [who had no intent for Shevisah] to teach the extremity of Chachamim's opinion;

Even though one could say that since an awake person acquires Shevisah, also a sleeping person does, Chachamim do not say this;

Or, perhaps he holds that Hefker does not acquire Shevisah. A sleeping person acquires Shevisah because an awake person does.

Answer (Rav Yosef - Beraisa): If rain fell before Yom Tov, it has (may be moved) 2000 Amos. If it fell on Yom Tov, [it did not acquire Shevisah, and] one may take it wherever he may go.

If R. Yochanan ben Nuri holds that Hefker objects acquire Shevisah, we can say that this Beraisa is like him;

However, if he holds that Hefker does not acquire Shevisah, this Beraisa is unlike him, and unlike Chachamim! (Chachamim give only four Amos.)

Question (Rav Safra): Perhaps it discusses rain near a city. People of the city have intent for the rain!

Answer (Abaye): You cannot argue with Rav Yosef!

(Mishnah): [Water of] a private pit is like the owner. (One may take it to where the owner may go.) A city pit is like the residents. a pit of Olei Bavel (for people coming to Eretz Yisrael, it is Hefker) is like the one who drew the water.

Contradiction (Beraisa): A pit of Shevatim (i.e. Olei Bavel) has 2000 Amos in every direction.

Resolution: We must say that the Mishnah is Chachamim, and the Beraisa is R. Yochanan ben Nuri.

Abaye told Rav Yosef how he answered Rav Safra's question.

Rav Yosef: You should have refuted him from the Beraisa itself. It gives 2000 Amos to rain that fell before Yom Tov;

If the rain was near a city and they intended for it, it would have their Techum!

(Beraisa): If it fell on Yom Tov, one may take it wherever he may go.

Question: Why didn't it acquire Shevisah in the ocean?

Suggestion: The Beraisa is unlike R. Eliezer, who says that all water in the world comes from the ocean. (Rather, it is like R. Yehoshua, who says that clouds come from the upper waters - Ta'anis 9b.)

Answer: No, the case is, the clouds [from which the rain came] were already formed from before Yom Tov.

Question: Perhaps those clouds went away and the rain came from other clouds [that were not formed before Yom Tov]!

Answer #1: There is a Siman (identifying sign) that these are the same clouds.

Answer #2: This is a Safek about a mid'Rabanan law, therefore we are lenient.