5

There is a issur to move four amot without a Kippa, or six feet according to Sepharadim. (Shulchan Aruch 2:6) (Well there is a machloket wether it's really an issur or not, but that is a seperate issue. See Kaf Hachaim on the above for more on the subject.)

If a person was being moved by an outside force without a kippa, would that be violating the above? Or would it not be an issue since he isn't moving, but rather he is being moved. One practical example of this is a car. If someone is in a moving car, do they need to be wearing a kippa?

This question also extends to airplanes and roller coasters.

Improve this question
3
  • 1
    Is it a convertible with the roof open?
    – Rabbi Kaii
    Commented Aug 20 at 16:39
  • 1
    @RabbiKaii Would that make a practical difference? In the case of the car and plane, he is under a closed roof. However, in the case of a roller coaster, nothing is above him.
    – Eli
    Commented Aug 20 at 16:41
  • Some say that the roof above one's head counts as a covering, but AFAIK no one rules this way lechatchilah
    – Noach MiFrankfurt
    Commented Aug 20 at 17:12

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6

If a person was being moved by an outside force without a kippa, would that be violating the above?

The Ba'er Hetev (Orach Chaim 2:6) writes, citing the Taz, that riding an animal or a cart, can be viewed as walking.

ט"ז סי' זה ס"ק ה' כתב דה"ה אם רוכב על גבי בהמה או יושב בעגלה הוי כמהלך

The Taz in section 1, subsection 5, wrote that this also applies if one is riding on an animal or sitting in a wagon; it is considered like walking.

The relevant Taz reads as follow:

ונראה לי דהוא הדין אם רוכב על גבי בהמה או יושב בעגלה הוא כמהלך דהא אמרינן ספ"ק דקידושין רוכב כמהלך דמי

It seems to me that the same applies if one is riding an animal or sitting in a wagon; it is considered like walking, as we find in the first chapter of Kiddushin: a rider is considered as walking.

So, according to this opinion, maybe we can extrapolate the idea and say that riding a car is similair to riding a donkey, and thus walking?

Improve this answer
1
  • 5
    The wagon under discussion likely had no roof. The very next sentence in the Ba'eir Heiteiv that you cited provides grounds for lenience in a car with a covered roof: "ומהרש"ל כתב הא דאסור לילך בקומה זקופה ובגילוי הראש היינו דוקא תחת אויר הרקיע אבל לא בבית כי אינו נראה כ"כ שאינו משגיח במורא של הקב"ה כ"א תחת אויר הרקיע ע"ש וכ' ע"ת ויש לסמוך על זה בעת הצורך"
    – Fred
    Commented Aug 20 at 21:45

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .