Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 358 - The Laws [Clarifying] Which Places Are Defined As Enclosed for [the Purpose of] Human Habitation

SECTION 358 The Laws [Clarifying] Which Places Are Defined As Enclosed for [the Purpose of] Human Habitation

1 The Sages forbade carrying [objects] for more than four cubits in any area that was surrounded by walls that was not enclosed for the purpose of human habitation,1 i.e., a place where people do not enter or depart on an ongoing basis,2 [likening it to carrying in] a public domain. Examples [of such areas are] a lot behind a house,3 a karpeif, i.e., a large enclosed area where wood is stored, a garden, and an orchard4 that is encompassed by a fence ten handbreadths high, or similar areas,5 as will be explained in sec. 362[:1].

[Such an area] is deemed a private domain in a complete sense according to Scriptural Law, and one who throws an object into it from the public domain is liable6 since [this area] is surrounded by actual partitions; it is only that [the area] lacks inhabitants. [Nevertheless, such domains] are deemed as a karmelis according to Rabbinic Law. [The rationale is that] since [these areas] were not made for the purpose of habitation, they may be confused with a public domain if they are [comprised of] a large enclosed area. If, however, [these areas] are only [comprised of] a small enclosed area, they will not be confused with a public domain, and it is permitted to carry in them even though they were not enclosed for the purpose of habitation.

2 What is defined as a small enclosure? [An enclosure whose area is] less than or exactly the size of beis sasayim, an area large enough for two seah [of grain] to be sown in it, like the courtyard of the Sanctuary7 that was 100 [cubits] long and 50 [cubits] wide,8 i.e., twice an area 50 [cubits] by 50 [cubits]. For 50 [cubits] by 50 [cubits], i.e., 2500 square cubits, is an area in which one seah [of grain] can be sown. Thus, [a space] that is 5000 square cubits9 [is an area in which] two seah can be sown (beis sasayim).

Any area of this size, whether round or square, i.e., its length is 70⅔ cubits plus a small amount on all sides, [is governed by these laws]. Our Sages were not concerned with an exact measurement.10 [The same applies to a rectangle.] Its width [may vary, but even] if [the rectangle] is long and narrow, e.g., it is 100 [cubits] long and 50 [cubits] wide, [one] is permitted to carry in its entire area, provided [the rectangle’s] length is not more than a cubit longer than twice its width, like the courtyard of the Sanctuary that was not even a cubit longer than twice its width.11 However, [if its length is] less than a cubit [longer than twice its width, the difference between length and width] is not significant and it does not [cause carrying] to be forbidden.

3 Our Sages derived these measures from the size of the courtyard of the Sanctuary, since all of the [forbidden] labors of Shabbos and the [pertinent Shabbos] laws are derived from the Sanctuary.12 [The people] would carry within the entire courtyard of the Sanctuary even though it was not enclosed for the purpose of human habitation.13 Therefore, our Sages did not desire to forbid carrying in [an enclosure] of this size or less. If, however, [an enclosure] is even slightly larger than this size, it is forbidden to carry [objects] more than four cubits in it. Similarly, [it is forbidden] to transfer [objects] from [another] courtyard to it or from it to [another] courtyard.14

4 Even if an enclosure is smaller than this size, only objects that were located in [the enclosure] or in the courtyard at the onset of Shabbos are permitted to be transferredfrom [the enclosure] to the courtyard or from the courtyard to [the enclosure]. By contrast, objects that were located in a home at the onset of Shabbos and then taken out to the courtyard may not be transferred] to [the enclosure].15 Similarly, objects that were located in [the enclosure] at the onset of Shabbos and [were] then transferred to the courtyard are forbidden to be transferred to the house.16 (Even objects that were located in a courtyard at the onset of Shabbos and were taken into the house or into [the enclosure] may not be transferred from one [area] to the other unless they were placed down in the courtyard in the interim.)17 [The rationale for these stringencies is that] this area was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation. [Hence,] it is deemed an independent domain, distinct from the home, which is an actual dwelling.

[The enclosure] is, however, considered as [part of] the same domain as the courtyard,18 even though the courtyard is deemed as enclosed for the purpose of habitation. Even if the courtyard belongs to one person, and the karpeif or a similar area that was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation belongs to another [person], and [the two] did not establish an eruv, it is permitted to carry from one [area] to the other, as will be explained in sec. 372[:1].

Establishing an eruv is not, however, effective in granting license to carry [an object] from the house to the karpeif and the like or from [the karpeif and the like] to the house. [Indeed,] it is forbidden to do so according to Rabbinic Law even if [both properties] belong to one person. [The rationale is that taking an object from one of these types of property to a home] is comparable to transferring [it] from one domain to another. As will be explained in sec. 359[:1], a lot behind a home is an exception [to the above rule] because it is considered as the same domain as the home.

5 Whenever an area was enclosed for the purpose of habitation, i.e., one enters and leaves it continually,19 e.g., a pen,20 a corral,21 or a courtyard, it is permitted to carry in [that area] in its entirety22 even if it is several mil [long].23 [Similarly,] it is permitted to carry from [this area] to the home and from the home to [this area].24

In the same vein, as explained in sec. 345[:23], the roof of a home is deemed a private domain. It is permitted to carry on the entire [roof] even if [the roof] is larger than beis sasayim. [Similarly, it is permitted to carry] from the roof to the house below it and from the house to the roof.25

It is [also] permitted to carry from the roof to a karpeif and the like, just as [it is permitted to carry] from a courtyard and the like to a karpeif.26

6 Even [though this is not the ordinary practice, nevertheless,] if a karpeif or the like was enclosed for the purpose of habitation, it is governed by the same laws that apply to a courtyard with regard to all matters. Thus, it is permitted to carry more than four cubits in it even if it is larger than beis sasayim. Similarly, [it is permitted to carry] from [such a karpeif] to a home and from a home to [such a karpeif].27

What is meant by [the phrase], “being enclosed for the purpose of habitation”? [For example,] initially28 one made a hut for a watchman29 where he will dwell [both] during the day and night, or one initially built a dwelling there even if he does not dwell there continuously, and [only] afterwards did he surround [the enclosure] with walls.

[The same laws apply] even if one merely first opened an entrance from his home30 (or an entrance already existed), and he then surrounded [the area] with three other walls next to the wall of the house where the entrance is located. [Such an enclosure is considered] an enclosure for the purpose of habitation. Since [the enclosure] is open to a dwelling, it is considered like the dwelling, similar to a courtyard of a home. Nonetheless, [for an enclosure to receive this status,] when making its walls, it is necessary that they be made for the purpose of habitation.

7 Therefore, if one made walls around an area and afterwards constructed a dwelling there, or if he made an opening [to the enclosure] from his home after [the enclosure was already constructed], his actions are of no consequence.31 Even if when making the enclosure [the person] had the intent to build [a dwelling within the enclosed area] or to open [an entrance from his home, the person’s actions and his intent] are of no consequence.

Nevertheless, it is not necessary that all the walls [of an enclosure] be made for the purpose of habitation. Even if an enclosure had three complete walls and only the fourth wall had an opening larger than ten cubits [wide] (an opening of this size nullifies the wall, as will be explained in sec. 362[18]), and before [the person] enclosed the part of the gap that was larger than ten [cubits], he built a hut or a dwelling or opened an entrance from a dwelling, [the enclosure] is considered as having been enclosed for the purpose of habitation. [Similarly,] if [a person] built a dwelling near this opening and then enclosed [the portion of the open space of the fourth side] that was more than ten cubits [long], leaving ten [cubits to serve] as an entrance from this dwelling, [the enclosure] is also considered as having been enclosed for the purpose of habitation.

Similarly, if [an area] had already been enclosed entirely for a purpose other than habitation, [one] may open up a portion [of its walls] larger than ten [cubits]32 and then enclose [that area] for the purpose of habitation, or enclose only [the portion that] exceeds ten [cubits], leaving ten [cubits] as an opening. [Afterwards, the area is considered as having been enclosed for the purpose of habitation].

8 [Similarly,] if one tore down [a portion of the wall of an enclosure] a cubit [long] and rebuilt it for the purpose of habitation, then tore down [another portion] a cubit [long] and then rebuilt it [for the purpose of habitation], continuing this process until he completed [tearing down and rebuilding] more than ten [cubits], it is permitted [to carry in the enclosure]. It is considered as if [the person] tore down [the entire wall] at once, since a new entity has come into being, just as if he tore down [the entire wall] at once and then enclosed it afterwards.

If [the person] tore down more than ten [cubits] and made a tzuras hapesach33 for the sake of habitation, it is as effective as if he enclosed [the open portion] for the sake of habitation.34

9 If [one desires to nullify an enclosure, but] finds it difficult to break down its wall, there are authorities who maintain that there is a means [to nullify the distinction of the wall as an enclosure. The person should] place earth that is less than ten handbreadths high35 and four or more handbreadths wide36 on both sides of the wall for a length of more than ten cubits. Thus, if the wall is less than twenty handbreadths high, the upper part of the wall will not be ten handbreadths above the earth. Hence, [the wall] is considered as “breached” in the place where the earth is located. [The rationale is that] since [the mound] is not ten handbreadths high, people at large will [be able to] walk over [the mound of] earth. Now, from the earth [of the mound], it is possible to climb on the wall. [Thus,] since [the wall] is not ten handbreadths above [the mound], it is as if the space is entirely open.

The earth should be left there for at least one Shabbos.37Before [the person] clears away [the earth] from [next to the wall], he should construct a dwelling inside [the enclosure] or make an opening to [the enclosure] from a dwelling. Afterwards, when [the person] clears away [the earth] from there and the wall [is restored] to its height of ten [handbreadths or more], it is as if he built the wall anew for the purpose of habitation. Although this wall is made as a matter of course38 because [the person] removed the earth outside it, that is not significant, as will be explained in sec. 362[:4].39

There are authorities who differ with this [ruling], maintaining that the fact that one nullified the earth [by] leaving it there over one Shabbos [thus making it part of the ground]40 is not at all effective in nullifying the wall and causing [the space] to be considered as open. [Their rationale] is that [from the very outset, the person] intended to clear [the earth] from there afterwards.41 Earth can only nullify a wall [when it is considered as part of the ground, i.e.,] when one’s intent is for [the earth] to remain there forever. If so, [in this instance, since the person intended to remove the earth after Shabbos,] through what [lasting] act is [the enclosure] considered as having been enclosed for the purpose of habitation?

Therefore, the earth is not effective [in negating the original wall] unless it is ten handbreadths high and is set off [at least] three handbreadths from [the inner side of] the wall.42 In this instance, [the earth] is considered as a new wall that nullifies the first wall along a distance greater than ten cubits, as will be explained.43 In such an instance, it is not necessary for [the mound of dirt] to be four handbreadths wide.44 Nor is it necessary to place [the earth] on both sides of the wall; [it] only [has to be placed] on the [wall’s] inner side. [Placing it] on the outer side, however, serves no purpose.

[Since] the matter concerns a Rabbinic decree, the more lenient opinion may be followed.

10 There are authorities who maintain that in the present age, it can be assumed that a karpeif is enclosed for the purpose of habitation, because it is common to open an entrance [from a home] first and then to enclose the area.45 There are [more lenient] authorities who make a further assumption: that any karpeif that is located within [a town’s] Shabbos limits46 is considered as enclosed for the purpose of habitation, because [the owner’s] intent is to make [continuous use of it] on Shabbos. Fundamentally, [this approach] is not accepted, as explained above47 with regard to a lot that is behind homes, [for when the lot] is larger than beis sasayim, it is [governed by the same laws as] a karmelis,48 as will be explained in sec. 359[:1].

11 A mound that is ten handbreadths high is considered as a karpeif. Up until beis sasayim, it is permitted to carry upon the entire [mound] because the principle of gud asik [is applied]49 and it is considered as if its walls [extend] higher [than] ten handbreadths. Thus, [the mound] is considered as surrounded [by an enclosure. If the mound is] larger than beis sasayim, one may only carry four cubits [on top of] it, because it was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation.50

12 When trees are planted in a karpeif larger than beis sasayim to reduce its [open] space,51 its space is not considered as having been reduced.52 [The rationale is that] it is common for there to be trees in a karpeif. Therefore, even if the trees were ten [handbreadths] high and four [handbreadths] wide – in which instance, [each tree] is defined as a separate domain – they do not reduce [the open space of the karpeif].

Similarly, cisterns in gardens, even those ten [handbreadths] deep and four [handbreadths] wide,53 are made to serve the garden, to provide it with water. Hence, [these cisterns] do not reduce [the garden’s open space]. However, another entity that is not necessary for the garden (and is not commonly found there)54 does reduce [its open space].

13 [When a person] built a pillar that is three handbreadths [or more] in area in a karpeif and thus reduced its open space, it reduces [the] open space [of the karpeif]. If [the pillar] is smaller than [three handbreadths], it is not considered as significant because of its negligible size.55

14 [The following rules apply when a person] built a wall longer than ten [cubits] in front of [a domain’s] original wall to nullify it so that [the original wall] will be considered as if it does not exist – [doing so with the intent that the construction of] this wall would cause [the domain to be considered as] enclosed for the purpose of habitation,56 e.g., [the person] built a dwelling or opened an entrance from a dwelling before building this wall: If [the person built the new wall at a] distance [of at least] three handbreadths from the original [wall], it is permitted [to carry in the enclosure];57 if not, his actions are of no consequence. [The rationale is that based on the principle of] lavud, whenever [one entity] is less than three handbreadths [away from another, they are considered as] joined, and [the new wall] is considered as nothing more than an addition to the thickness of the first. [An exception is made] only when [building the second wall less than three handbreadths from the original wall] reduces the [total] size [of the enclosure, causing it] to be smaller than beis sasayim, as will be explained below.58

15 [The following rules are relevant when a person] applies mortar to the existing walls for the purpose of reducing the size of the enclosure, and it becomes less than beis sasayim: If the mortar is thick enough that [even] if the wall would be removed, it [the mortar] could stand independently, [the size of the enclosure is considered] to have been reduced.59 If not, [the] size [of the enclosure] is not [considered] to have been reduced.

16 If one built walls for the sake of habitation on top of [an enclosure’s] original walls, his act is of absolutely no consequence. [The rationale is that] the original walls still exist below; [the person] merely raised their height. If [afterwards], the original [walls] sink [into the ground] and the upper [walls] remain, [carrying in the enclosure] becomes permissible because of [the new walls].60 [This ruling applies] even though the wall’s [existence] comes about on its own accord, as it were.61

[A different rule applies if] one constructed a wall for the sake of habitation around a mound62 that is larger than beis sasayim:63 [The wall] is effective [and allows the person to carry in the enclosure] even if it was not distanced three handbreadths from the edge [of the mound. True,] the principle gud asik is applied in this instance, and the borders all around [the] edges [of the mound] are considered to be extended upward. Thus, the walls are [built] on top of [these virtual] walls. Nevertheless, since [the person] lives in the inner space encompassed by these walls that were currently made for the purpose of habitation, [the enclosure] is considered as enclosed for the purpose of habitation. [This ruling applies] even if [the person] only made one wall longer than ten [cubits].64

17 When [the owner] planted trees in the greater portion of a karpeif that was enclosed for the purpose of habitation and that is larger than beis sasayim, it is not considered as if [the trees] nullify the dwelling that is there.65 [This ruling applies] even if [the trees] are not planted in even rows.66 [The rationale is that] it is common for people to continually spend time under the shade of trees. If, by contrast, one sowed the major portion of [such an enclosure67 with crops] – even if [the portion sown] is smaller than beis sasayim – they nullify the dwelling. [The rationale is that] it is not common to dwell [in a place] where crops [are sown]. The smaller portion that was not sown is considered as insignificant in relation to the larger portion that was sown. [Hence, carrying in] the entire [enclosure] is forbidden as if it was not encompassed for the purpose of habitation.

[The following rules apply if crops] were sown in only the lesser portion [of the enclosure].68 If the area sown is [not larger than] beis sasayim, it is permitted to carry in the entire [enclosure. The rationale is that] even if the dwelling was nullified in the portion that was sown, [that portion] is not larger than beis sasayim. The remainder [of the area] that was not sown is not nullified in relation to the portion that was sown to produce an area larger than beis sasayim, since [only] the lesser portion of the enclosure was sown. Nevertheless, it is forbidden to carry from this karpeif to a house or from a house to [the karpeif. The rationale is that] in the place where [crops] were sown, [the karpeif’s connection to] a dwelling was nullified and it is governed by the laws applying to a karpeif that was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation, i.e., one may not carry [an object] from [such a karpeif] to a house, as explained above.69 If so, it is forbidden [to carry from the house] to the remainder [of the enclosure] that was not sown. [The rationale is that] there is no barrier separating between [the two portions of the enclosure]; instead, they are entirely open [to each other].70

There are authorities who permit [carrying from the house] to the remainder [of the enclosure] in which [crops] were not sown. [The rationale is that the principle] – it is forbidden [to carry in an area that] is open entirely to [an area where it is forbidden to carry] – applies only when [the permitted area] is open to an area that is inherently forbidden, for example, [an area that is] a karmelis in a complete sense. In this instance, however, the prohibition [against carrying to the portion of the enclosure where crops were sown] is only [enforced] because of the house.71 [Hence, the area where crops were sown] does not cause [carrying from the house to] the remainder [of the area where crops] were not sown to be forbidden, even though [the portion of the enclosure that is not sown] is entirely open [to the portion that is sown. With regard to actual practice,] one should be stringent and follow the first opinion.72

If, however, the smaller portion [of the enclosure where crops] were sown is less than beis sasayim, it is even permitted to carry from [this part of the enclosure] to the house and from the house to it. True, the same [law] applies to all karpeifim whether they are the size of beis sasayim or smaller:73 If [the karpeifim] were not enclosed for the purpose of habitation, one may not carry from them to a home. Nevertheless, this instance [is an exception]. Since [crops] have not been sown in the majority [of the enclosure] and it is enclosed for the purpose of habitation, the smaller [sown] portion is insignificant and subsumed [in the larger portion] unless it is [at least] the size of beis sasayim, the size of the courtyard of the Sanctuary. In that instance, [the sown portion of the enclosure] is [considered] an important entity, and hence, is not considered insignificant [and subsumed in the larger portion].

There are authorities who prohibit carrying [an object] to the house from [the portion of the enclosure where crops] were sown, but permit [doing so] from the portion where [crops] were not sown. With regard to actual practice, [we follow the principle:] In matters involving a Rabbinic safeguard, the lenient approach may be followed.

If the lesser portion is larger than beis sasayim, it is forbidden to carry more than four cubits in the entire karpeif. [The rationale is that the portion in which crops] were sown is a karmelis, as is the law pertaining to a karpeif larger than beis sasayim that was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation,74 and the remainder [of the enclosure] in which [crops] were not sown is entirely open to [the portion where crops were sown].75

All the above applies to a karpeif in which [crops] were sown that is larger than beis sasayim. If, however, [a karpeif] is only the size of beis sasayim [or less], even if [crops] were sown in its entirety, there is a doubt whether [the crops] nullify the dwelling. Similarly, there is a doubt regarding [the ruling concerning] a courtyard or lot behind a house76 in which crops were sown in their majority – do crops nullify the dwelling? Perhaps [sowing crops] nullifies only a dwelling in a karpeif that is larger than beis sasayim, since it is not considered so significant a dwelling, even though [the area] was enclosed for the purpose of habitation. Stringency should be followed in all these instances.

Accordingly, [the following laws apply when] someone has a garden77 sown in his courtyard and there is no halachically valid partition separating the [garden and the courtyard]: If the portion that was sown constitutes the majority of the courtyard – even though the entire courtyard, including the portion that was sown, is not the size of beis sasayim – one should not carry from the portion that was sown and the [rest of the] courtyard to the home nor from the home to them. [The rationale is that] it is possible that the crops nullify [the connection between] the dwelling and the courtyard, and the smaller portion [of the courtyard]78 is considered secondary to the larger portion.79 Thus, the entire courtyard is considered as a karpeif that was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation. [In that instance,] even if [the karpeif] is smaller than beis sasayim, one may not carry [an object] from it to the house.

If the entire courtyard, together with the portion that was sown, is larger than beis sasayim, one may not carry [more than] four cubits in the entire courtyard, as is the ruling with regard to a karpeif larger than beis sasayim that was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation. True, the courtyard was enclosed for the purpose of habitation. Nevertheless, it is combined with [the portion] that was sown so that [the total area] is considered larger than beis sasayim, since [the portion that was not sown] is considered secondary [to the portion that was sown] because of its smaller size.

[More lenient laws apply] if ]the portion] that was sown is the smaller part of the courtyard. If [that portion] alone is larger than beis sasayim, it causes carrying [more than] four cubits to be forbidden in the entire courtyard, since [the portion of the courtyard that was not sown] is open entirely to [the portion that was sown]. If [the portion that was sown] was exactly the size of beis sasayim, one should be stringent and refrain from carrying from the entire courtyard into the house. If [the portion that was sown] is smaller than beis sasayim, leniency may be shown and one may even carry from [the portion] that was sown into the home or the converse.80

18 If, however, a valid divider [separates] between [the portion that was sown] and [the remainder of the courtyard], the portion that was sown does not cause [carrying in] the courtyard to be forbidden at all. However, if [the portion] that was sown is larger than beis sasayim, carrying [an object] from the courtyard to [the portion that was sown] is forbidden even when carrying within four cubits [alone].

If [the portion of the karpeif that was sown] is exactly the size of beis sasayim or smaller, one may [carry] in [the karpeif] articles that were located in it or in the courtyard at the beginning of the Shabbos, but not articles that were located in the house [at that time].

For this reason, it is proper not to eat or drink in a garden on Shabbos, because it is [virtually] impossible to be careful about this matter.81 [The fact that the entire enclosure] was enclosed for the purpose of habitation does not affect the status of a garden, because the crops nullify the dwelling, as explained above.82

19 [The following rules apply when] water83 enters a karpeif that is larger than beis sasayim [and] that was enclosed for the purpose of habitation:84 If [the water] is fit to drink, its [presence] does not [cause the connection between the courtyard and] the dwelling to be nullified. [On the contrary,] there is no better dwelling than this.85 [This ruling applies] even if the place into which [the water] flows is larger than beis sasayim and even if [the water] is very deep.86

If [the water] is not fit to drink and it is ten handbreadths deep, [the area] is governed by the same laws that apply to crops [that were sown there]. If, by contrast, the water is not ten handbreadths deep, it is considered like mud or a puddle, which do not constitute a domain in their own right.87 [Even if the water] is ten handbreadths deep, if [the ground] drops ten handbreadths within four cubits, [the place where] the water [flows] serves as a divider between it and the rest of the karpeif, as explained in sec. 345[:2] and sec. 356[:2. In such an instance, carrying] is not forbidden in the remainder of the karpeif even though [the karpeif] is entirely open to [the water].

20 When a karpeif large enough for three seah to be sown in it was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation, and one built a roof over an area in which one seah could be sown, it is permitted to carry in the entire karpeif.88([The rationale is that] we consider the edge of the roof as if it is a partition that descends, closing off [the roofed portion] and separating between the area in which two seah can be sown and [the area where] the third [seah could be sown].)89

[This leniency applies] even if the roof is slanted,90 (in which instance, [generally,] we do not apply the principle [that] the edge of the roof [is a partition that] descends and closes off [the area], as will be explained in sec. 361[:6]. In this instance, [however, our Sages] ruled leniently, [and]) nonetheless considered it as if there is a valid partition at the end of the roofed portion.

21 When [part of a wall around] a karpeif that is exactly the size of beis sasayim and that was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation is [breached, and thus the karpeif becomes] entirely open to a courtyard, it is forbidden [to carry in the karpeif. The rationale is that] the area where the wall is breached increases its size,91 causing it to become larger than beis sasayim.

It is permitted [to carry] in the courtyard as long as the opening does not encompass the entire side of the courtyard and is not more than ten cubits [wide],92 (for example, [an instance where] the karpeif is narrow [where it meets the courtyard] and then steadily widens. Were this not to be so, the length [of the karpeif]would be more than twice its breadth, and it is forbidden to carry four cubits in it even if [its wall] is not breached at all.)93

If, however, [the wall of the karpeif] is not breached entirely, but instead, a barrier remains on both sides, the place where [the wall] is breached does not cause [the size of the karpeif] to be increased. [The rationale is that] the inner edges [of the remaining barrier] are, [in a virtual sense, considered to be] extended and to enclose [the karpeif. The space] beyond the inner edge [of the remaining barrier] is deemed as a domain in its own right. For this reason, it is forbidden to carry from a house to a doorstep if there is not a lintel four [handbreadths] wide above the doorstep, as explained in sec. 346[:8-10].94

(Even if [the wall of the karpeif] is breached in its entirety, [carrying in the karpeif] is not forbidden unless the walls along its length project outward and extend into the inner space of the courtyard, and are set off [at least] three handbreadths from the walls of the length of the courtyard. If that is not the case, it is permitted [to carry inside the karpeif] because of the edges [of the wall] of the courtyard,95 as will be explained in sec. 360[:7].) [See fig. 47.]

22 When an entrance from a dwelling was opened to a karpeif larger than beis sasayim that was not enclosed for the purpose of habitation, this entrance is not effective [in changing the status of the karpeif].96 If afterwards, a second wall [longer] than ten [cubits] was erected for [the karpeif, carrying] is permitted because of this wall that was erected after opening the entrance, since [its presence] nullifies the first wall that was not erected for the purpose of habitation.97 If afterwards, this second wall falls, the karpeif returns to [its original status and carrying inside it is] forbidden. [The logic – that] since [carrying in the karpeif] was permitted, it remains permitted – is not applied, because the original wall is now [once again] effective [in enclosing the area].98