Hot answers tagged lomdus
To answer a mistaken premise of the question -- boneh is possible on the human body. See Shabbos 107a: המפיס מורסא בשבת אם לעשות לה פה חייב אם להוציא ממנה לחה פטור If someone pops a pimple on Shabbos -- if he did so to make an opening, then he is liable for punishment; if he intended to remove the pus from inside, he is not liable Rashi there ...
Rabbi Aqiva Eiger (shu”t #136) says that there are two types of doubt, and each has its own mechanism for birur, for clarification. The case of qavu’ah is one where the reality was once established. So in principle, there is a specific halakhah assigned already to this case. The doubt is in what that halakhah is. In this situation, we do not invoke rules ...
I don't have Kahati but from the Bartenura I will say that we are dealing with a legality in the second case that doesn't apply to the first. In the second case the plaintiff points to the big ox and says this one damaged mine. To which the defendant responds by pointing to a different, smaller ox and says no, this one did. Now, although value wise the ...
it would be interesting according to R Yosef engel ( Lekach Tov, Klall 1) who entertains a third option as to how shlichus works, in that the shliach remains an independent entity, while his creation of a specific halachic chalos works and is effective for the meshaleach, where as the first mehalech is power of attorney, and special strength is invested in ...
Long debated question, קצות החושן brings this question down as a מחלוקת among the ראשונים. The following is based on part of this shiur: So how exactly is שלוחו של אדם כמותו? One side sees the messenger as a person on his own, given the power, or permission, to create consequences for the sender, where usually one could not do so for another. The other ...
As @Fred basically notes in the comment, the "davar" in the pasuk which requires "al pi shnayim" is the actual event/act itself, not the myriad details and preconditions that enable it (e.g. soklin al hachazaka by incest). Further, it would be hard to apply an anan sahadi to a scenario that does not conform to normal human nature, such as murder.
Rashash (on the mishna in the g'mara) cites a machlokes as to who has to provide the location of the divider: Rashbam says it's the seller [as do Rabenu Ger'shom on the page of the g'mara, alleged Rashi on the page of the Rif, and Nimuke Yosef], while Rambam (commentary on the mishna) says it's the buyer.
As explained in the Mishna Berurah siman 303 #82 the reason braiding hair would be Boneh rather than Oreig is specifically because it is attached to and part of the human body. This then would not be a contradiction to the fact that it is an erva, but rather a complimentary idea.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible