Opening an umbrella on Shabbat is generally considered to be forbidden because of building. The linked article notes that while the g'mara (not specifically cited) does permit opening a folding chair, even though that creates a "tent" over the ground below, the purpose of opening the chair isn't to create the tent, while the purpose of erecting a structure ...
Shulchan Aruch 301:37 says:
It's permissible to go out on Shabas with handgear called guantes [=gloves]. But some are strict to require that one sew them before Shabas to the handgear [=sleeves] of his clothes, or tie them to them well with a durable knot; and it is seemly to worry about that view.
Mishna B'rura (ad loc.) says:
Those who are strict, ...
Mesechtas Shabbos 3a Shmuel says that every time it says Patur (exempt) by the laws of Shabbos it means Patur Avol Assur (exempt [from Korban/death], but still forbidden [rabbinically]) besides for 3 cases which are listed there. Rashi explains that means that it is 100% not permitted M'Drabanan.
The carrying Gemara in the question says Patur.
There are two distinct issues to deal with in this question:
The question of ohel due to the size of the hat brim.
The question of wearing a hat that can be blown off and thus lead to possible carrying.
It is important to bear in mind that in both issues we are dealing with a d'rabbanan issue, which leaves us open to be more lenient than if we were dealing ...
Bartenura Shabbat 1:1:
ולהכי נקט הוצאה בלשון עני ועשיר, דאגב אורחיה קמ״ל דמצוה הבאה בעבירה אסורה וחייבין עליה:
The reason for discussing carrying between domains in the context of a poor and rich person, is to teach something tangential, namely that a mitzvah performed via an aveirah [i.e. giving charity while carrying on shabbat] is forbidden, ...
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 ...
If you can find a Makom Patur (a fire hydrant), do so.
If not, then if you didn't stop in a rshus harabim, go back to a rshus hayachid (private property) so that there will be no uprooting with setting down.
The main thing to remember is DO NOT STOP if you find yourself carrying. IF you did, leave it where you are (You just did a hanacha by setting ...
Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 301:34 and Mishna Berura SK 129
Shulchan Aruch Harav 301:37
Rambam Mishna Torah Shabbos 19:19 and 19:17
Basically, you can take a handkerchief and wear it as a belt or scarf, as long as you tie the ends together. If it is big enough that it covers your head and majority of your body (like a big tallit) you can wear it that way ...
Tosfos Eruvin (86b) and Mishne Berurah (355:6) explain that since the waste initially travels into an extension of the private domain, it is permitted. Even though the waste might later travel into a larger body of water which would have the status of a karmelis, that is not your primary intention, and therefore it is allowed.
Even in a real public domain one can carry things within 4 Amot. (ShA OC 349)
So he was allowed to pick it up and put it on. Then he's wearing it and can continue walking.
(Though he might not have been allowed to wear it without enough clips to begin with...)
If it is serving a decorative function, it's not a problem. (See Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 303 and 310 and Shemirath Shabbath K'Hilkhatha 18:12. Hypothetically, if there's a chance the one wearing it is likely to take it out in reshuth harabim, then there could be a reason to forbid it. See Orach Chaim 303:18. Also, if the hat has a stiff brim that is more ...
At Yoatzot.org here, they answer as follows:
If the sole purpose is to protect the woman's clothing, the sanitary napkin should not be worn. But generally speaking, most women are also concerned about discomfort or irritation. Embarrassment may be construed as a type of discomfort.
There is a Mishna in Shabbos that says: "[If someone takes out with] his mouth ... he is not liable".
Tosefos asks on that from a Mishna in Krisos which says: "One could eat one thing and be obligated four Chatases... R' Meir said 'if it was Shabbos and someone carried, he is obligated.'"
Tosphos answers that the difference is that food is customarily ...
Kitzur Shlchan Aruch
The Kitzur Shlchan Aruch in סימן פב - אסור העברה והוצאה מרשות לרשות explicitly forbids it.
It's irrelevant if the child can already walk or not.
סעיף י': הָאִשָּׁה מְדַדָּה אֶת בְּנָהּ אֲפִלּוּ בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא תִּגְרְרֵהוּ, אֶלָּא יְהֵא מַגְבִּיהַּ רַגְלוֹ הָאַחַת וְיַנִּיחַ הַשְּׁנִיָּה עַל הָאָרֶץ ...
Mishna Shabbat 7, 3:
THEY ALSO STATED ANOTHER GENERAL PRINCIPLE: WHATEVER IS FIT TO PUT AWAY AND SUCH IS [GENERALLY] PUT AWAY, AND ONE CARRIES IT OUT ON THE SABBATH, HE IS LIABLE TO A SIN-OFFERING ON ITS ACCOUNT.
BUT WHATEVER IS NOT FIT TO PUT AWAY AND SUCH IS NOT [GENERALLY] PUT AWAY, AND ONE CARRIES IT OUT ON THE SABBATH, ONLY HE THAT PUT IT AWAY ...
Harav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach paskens quoted in Meor HaShabbat Peninei Homer 3:8 in regards to opening up bottle caps (which some are makpid not to open on Shabbos) if one may open it for someone else who is makpid not open them. Rav Shlomo Zalman says that it depends on whether the one abstaining from opening it does so because they hold that it is ...
R. Neuwirth in Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata (16:24) writes that one should not wear ordinary sunglasses in a place where there is no Eruv because they are not considered clothing. However, if the sunglasses are never taken off even indoors (eg. for medical reasons) then they are considered clothing and can be worn even outdoors with no Eruv. In footnote 94 he ...
Firstly, as Clint Eastwood already touched upon, it is not at all clear that the waste one flushes will go to either a reshus harabbim (public domain) or a karmalis, at least without requiring others to act further down the treatment process:
Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata (16:18, cf. footnotes 69, 82) notes that the practice is to be lenient and cites the following from Orchot Chayim (Shabbat 261) to try and justify the practice, though in closing with a reference to the Beiur Halacha (303:18 sv. Ki) he indicates how weak he believes the justification is.
וכן האשה לא תצא בדבר שהוא חוצץ בפני ...
I found in the Rivevos Ephraim 4:97:20 this question. Rav Ephraim Greenblatt asked Rav Nochum Kornmehl (Tiferes Tzvi) this question and Rav Greenblatt put it in his sefer:
He answered that one should sew the feather to the hat because one might take the feather out since sometimes one will go out without the feather.
Rav Yisrael Taplin goes through some ...
The answer is that it doesn't matter what the case is exactly. The Talmud is not responsible to provide an exact scenario.
However! It's your lucky day, because the Talmud (ibid.) provides a perfect scenario for you!
Here it is:
אמר רבה הזרק ונחה בפי הכלב או בפי הכבשן חייב והאנן ותנן קלטה אחר או קלטה הכלב או שנשרפה פטור התם דלא מכוין הכא דקא מכוין
See Shulchan Aruch HaRav Orech Chaim 301:42, at the end of the halacha. There, it is explained that one may wear two belts if each one is accomplishing something, and the wearer therefore derives benefit and satisfaction from it.
Without being able to read your rabbi's mind, it appears that he was telling you that if you use the secondary shabbat belt to ...
On your way, you may suddenly realize that you have something in your pocket. At that point, it would certainly be assur to continue to carry it. Checking your pockets prevents you from being in this situation so it is not a gezeira legezeira.
After a recent fatal accident at night in Manchester UK, Dayan G Krausz of Manchester Beis Din and Rav M M Schneebalg of Machzikei Hadass put out a joint notice encouraging people who walk at night in dark places to use these reflective armbands and specifically stating they may be worn on Shabbos.
It is not a concern , halacha is talking about a hat that serves a protection either from the sun or rain,but for stylish hats there is no problem.
see the Shulchan Aruch 301:40-41 Mishna Brurah 151-153.
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.
Regarding the first part of the question, Qitzur Shulhhan Arukh, Yalqut Yosef (Orahh Hayim 301:54) states (my translation):
מותר לצאת בשבת לרשות הרבים עם סיכת ראש שנועדה להתפיס את הכיפה לראש, ואין לחוש בזה לאיסור הוצאה בשבת.
It is permitted to travel between domains on Shabbat with a hair clip which is designed to secure the kippah on one's head and ...
Flushing a toilet is definitely not carrying because the network of sewage pipes under the city is a reshut hayachid. As to the outlet pipe, there is some delay and disconnect between the flush of your toilet and waste coming out the other end. You will contribute to the flow, but the stuff you flush only pushes out the stuff that flows out, so this action ...