Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

6

Indeed, as SethJ and ShmuelBrin noted in their comments, the Gemara (Eruvin 11b) discusses such a case. Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 362:12) summarizes it thus: כיפה, אם יש ברגליה דהיינו קודם שהתחיל להתעגל י' טפחים, מותרת משום צורת פתח "An archway, if its legs - before it begins to curve - are at least ten tefachim tall, then it is permissible as a ...


4

See Shevat HaLevi Chelek 6 Siman 68 at the end where he addresses this question. He brings those that are machmir however he says the pashtus from the gemorah (shulchan aruch and poskim) that carrying on chol hamoed is muter even without any essential need to carry.


3

Many rishonim (medieval rabbis) say that the removal of an object from its area of 4 Amot (cubits) by carrying it in a public domain (רה״ר) is the equivalent (or, it is a תולדה) of removing it from its רשות, domain. This, for example, is the wording of the רמב״ן on .שבת דף עג: ומעביר ארבע אמות ברה״ר היינו טעמא דלא תני ליה משום דתולדה דמוציא הוא, דכל ...


2

The Gemara Shabbos 8a says that Abaye holds that one isn't liable for throwing a basket 6 tefachim (to circumscribe a 4x4 tefachim square) by 10 tefachim. Rashi explains that the vessel is its own domain, and only objects were thrown in the mishkan, not domains. The Gemara (Eiruvin 90a) says that there is an argument between Rav and Shmuel whether one may ...


1

The question of the גמרא is based on the assumption that if something is moving, it is already נעקר, or in a state of עקירה. Therefore, if something fell out of the air into one's hand, even though we have the כלל that ידו של אדם חשובה לו כד׳ על ד, he still has not done the עקירה. The source for this can be found on .דף ג, where the גמרא says (depending on ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible