Anonymous

Hotzaah: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
12,034 bytes removed ,  13 July 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
 
(45 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Okay}}
{{Okay}}
One of the 39 Melachot which one is prohibited to do on [[Shabbat]] is [[Hotzah]], [[carrying]] from one domain to another. In general, one may not carry from a public domain to a private one, or visa versa. Additionally, one may not carry 4 [[amot]] in a public domain.<ref>The first Mishna in Maseches Shabbos explains that there is an issur deoraisa for a person to take an object from a reshus hayachid on Shabbos and place the object into a reshus harabim or vise versa. One who does so has violated Hotzah. There is also a rabbinic prohibition to do half of the melacha, by either picking up the object (akira) in order to transfer it or to place it done (hanacha) after it has been transferred. The Gemara (Shabbos 4a) indicates that akira and hanacha are only prohibited if the object is placed or removed from a platform of four by four tefachim. Interestingly, the Gemara (5a) states that a person’s hand is treated as if it is four by four tefachim.</ref> The definition of these domains and the exceptions under which a person may carry are described below. For a broader perspective about [[carrying on Shabbat]] and the modern Eruv, see our [[Introduction to the Modern Eruv]].
One of the 39 Melachot which one is prohibited to do on [[Shabbat]] is [[Hotzah]], [[carrying]] from one domain to another. In general, one may not carry from a public domain to a private one, or visa versa. Additionally, one may not carry 4 [[amot]] in a public domain.<ref>The first Mishna in Maseches Shabbos explains that there is an issur deoraisa for a person to take an object from a reshus hayachid on Shabbos and place the object into a reshus harabim or vise versa. One who does so has violated Hotzah. There is also a rabbinic prohibition to do half of the melacha, by either picking up the object (akira) in order to transfer it or to place it done (hanacha) after it has been transferred. The Gemara (Shabbos 4a) indicates that akira and hanacha are only prohibited if the object is placed or removed from a platform of four by four tefachim. Interestingly, the Gemara (5a) states that a person’s hand is treated as if it is four by four tefachim.</ref> The definition of these domains and the exceptions under which a person may carry are described below. For a broader perspective about [[carrying on Shabbat]] and the modern Eruv, see our [[Introduction to the Modern Eruv]], [[Mechitzot]], [[Eruv Chatzerot]], and [[Sechirut Reshut]] pages.
Regarding wearing a protective mask outside without an Eruv see [[Halachot_Related_to_Coronavirus#Eruv_Tavshilin_and_Eruv_Chatzerot]].
 
==Source==
==Source==


Line 59: Line 59:
====Ramifications of ''Ayti Rabbim''====
====Ramifications of ''Ayti Rabbim''====


#Several major rishonim including Ramban, Rashba, Ritva, and Meiri explicitly rule like Rabbi Yehuda. According to Ramban, this is also the view of the Rif and by extension the Rosh.<ref>Rashba 22a s.v. vkayma lan, Ritva 22a s.v. vkayma lan, Meiri Eruvin 18a s.v. v'anan, 20a s.v. vklal all hold like R' Yehuda and not Rabbanan. This also is the opinion of Ramban (Milchamot 6a) in understanding the Rif and Baal Hameor is also concerned for Rabbi Yehuda.</ref> However, the Rabbenu Chananel,<ref>Rabbenu Chananel (Shabbat 101a) proves that we hold like rabbanan from Shabbat 100a.</ref> Tosfot Rid,<ref>Tosfot Rid (Mehudra Telita Eruvin 22a s.v. vkol) holds like rabbanan.</ref> Rambam, according to most commentaries, Riaz,<ref>Riaz (Eruvin 2:1:7) holds like rabbanan. See Menuchat Ahava v. 3 p. 271 who proved that Riaz held like Rabbi Yehuda from earlier (1:1:5), really that is only because of the issue of how to close a reshut harabbim but not because of the issue of ayti rabbim.</ref> and Tosfot, according to some, argue that the halacha follows Rabbanan.<ref>Bet Efraim proves that Tosfot Eruvin 6b s.v. vha'amar holds like rabbanan. Rav Chaim Volozhin also assumes Tosfot hold like Rabbanan.</ref> Although Mishkenaot Yakov<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&st=&pgnum=131 Mishkenot Yakov OC 121 s.v. od] rules like Rabbi Yehuda and rejects the Knesset Yechezkel, Chacham Tzvi, and Mayim Rabbim since they didn't investigate the topic and they're against the rishonim such as Ramban.</ref> and Rav Aharon Kotler<ref>Mishnat Rebbe Aharon 6</ref> argue that the halacha follows Rabbi Yehuda because of the Ramban and his understanding the Rif and Rosh, most poskim follow rabbanan.<ref>Chatom Sofer 1:89 s.v. ma nishar and Imrei Yosher 1:2 hold like rabbanan. Bet Efraim 26 s.v. vheneh quotes that Magen Avraham 363:30, Chacham Tzvi 37, and Mayim Rabbim 34-35 follow rabbanan. Or Letzion 1:30 and Yabia Omer 9:33 agree with rabbanan. Rabbi Mordechai Lebhar in Or Torah v. 666 p. 780 questioned whether Sephardim should follow Rabbi Yehuda. Menuchat Ahava v. 3 p. 371 also is of the opinion that we follow Rabbi Yehuda.</ref> That is the position of the Bet Efraim<ref>Bet Efraim 26-27</ref> and Chazon Ish.<ref>Chazon Ish OC 107:4</ref> Rav Chaim Volozhin writes that there is what to rely upon to follow rabbanan. Mishna Brurah seems to hold that we do not follow the rabbanan, but their view can be used in conjunction with other factors to validate an eruv.
#Several major rishonim including Ramban, Rashba, Ritva, and Meiri explicitly rule like Rabbi Yehuda. According to Ramban, this is also the view of the Rif and by extension the Rosh.<ref>Rashba 22a s.v. vkayma lan, Ritva 22a s.v. vkayma lan, Meiri Eruvin 18a s.v. v'anan, 20a s.v. vklal all hold like R' Yehuda and not Rabbanan. This also is the opinion of Ramban (Milchamot 6a) in understanding the Rif and Baal Hameor is also concerned for Rabbi Yehuda.</ref> However, the Rabbenu Chananel,<ref>Rabbenu Chananel (Shabbat 101a) proves that we hold like rabbanan from Shabbat 100a.</ref> Rambam, according to most commentaries,<ref>Hilchot Shabbat 17:33 as understood by Maggid Mishna and Hagahot Maimoniyot and also explicit in Pirush Mishnayot (Eruvin 2:4)</ref> Tosfot Rid,<ref>Tosfot Rid (Mehudra Telita Eruvin 22a s.v. vkol) holds like rabbanan.</ref> Riaz,<ref>Riaz (Eruvin 2:1:7) holds like rabbanan. See Menuchat Ahava v. 3 p. 271 who proved that Riaz held like Rabbi Yehuda from earlier (1:1:5), really that is only because of the issue of how to close a reshut harabbim but not because of the issue of ayti rabbim.</ref> Ravyah,<ref>Shabbat 1:201 rules like the opinion of Rabbanan. See also 1:379 where he discusses Rabbi Yochanan but doesn't clarify whether the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan.</ref> Sefer Hameorot,<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=16123&st=&pgnum=26 Sefer Hameorot (Eruvin 17a)]</ref> Rav Ovadia Mbartenura,<ref>Eruvin 2:4</ref> and Tosfot, according to some, argue that the halacha follows Rabbanan.<ref>Bet Efraim proves that Tosfot Eruvin 6b s.v. vha'amar holds like rabbanan. Rav Chaim Volozhin also assumes Tosfot hold like Rabbanan.</ref> Although Mishkenaot Yakov<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&st=&pgnum=131 Mishkenot Yakov OC 121 s.v. od] rules like Rabbi Yehuda and rejects the Knesset Yechezkel, Chacham Tzvi, and Mayim Rabbim since they didn't investigate the topic and they're against the rishonim such as Ramban.</ref> and Rav Aharon Kotler<ref>Mishnat Rebbe Aharon 6</ref> argue that the halacha follows Rabbi Yehuda because of the Ramban and his understanding the Rif and Rosh, most poskim follow rabbanan.<ref>Shoshanim Ldovid (Eruvin 2:4), Chatom Sofer 1:89 s.v. ma nishar, and Imrei Yosher 1:2 hold like rabbanan. Bet Efraim 26 s.v. vheneh quotes that Magen Avraham 363:30, Chacham Tzvi 37, and Mayim Rabbim 34-35 follow rabbanan. Or Letzion 1:30 and Yabia Omer 9:33 agree with rabbanan. Rabbi Mordechai Lebhar in Or Torah v. 666 p. 780 questioned whether Sephardim should follow Rabbi Yehuda. Menuchat Ahava v. 3 p. 371 also is of the opinion that we follow Rabbi Yehuda.</ref> That is the position of the Bet Efraim<ref>Bet Efraim 26-27</ref> and Chazon Ish.<ref>Chazon Ish OC 107:4</ref> Rav Chaim Volozhin writes that there is what to rely upon to follow rabbanan. Mishna Brurah seems to hold that we do not follow the rabbanan, but their view can be used in conjunction with other factors to validate an eruv.
##According to Rabbi Yehuda, Mishkenot Yakov argues that tzurat hapetach is invalid if it goes over a main street in the town.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&st=&pgnum=118 Mishkenot Yakov 120 s.v. amnam] based on Hagahot Ashri (Eruvin 1:8)</ref> Bet Efraim argues with this understanding even within Rabbi Yehuda.<ref>Bet Efraim 26. Biur Halacha 345:9 s.v. vsheni seems to understand Hagahot Ashri like the Bet Efraim that there's reshut harabbim on both sides.</ref> Chazon Ish<ref>Chazon Ish OC 74:9 is lenient because we don't follow the Hagahot Ashri and ayti rabbim depends on a reshut harabbim.</ref> is also lenient for a different reason.
##According to Rabbi Yehuda, Mishkenot Yakov argues that tzurat hapetach is invalid if it goes over a main street in the town.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&st=&pgnum=118 Mishkenot Yakov 120 s.v. amnam] based on Hagahot Ashri (Eruvin 1:8)</ref> Bet Efraim argues with this understanding even within Rabbi Yehuda.<ref>Bet Efraim 26. Biur Halacha 345:9 s.v. vsheni seems to understand Hagahot Ashri like the Bet Efraim that there's reshut harabbim on both sides.</ref> Chazon Ish<ref>Chazon Ish OC 74:9 is lenient because we don't follow the Hagahot Ashri and ayti rabbim depends on a reshut harabbim.</ref> is also lenient for a different reason.
##If there were ''pasi biraot'' surrounding the city, according to the rabbanan, according to the Bet Efraim, the entire town is a reshut hayachid and a tzurat hapetach eruv works. Avnei Nezer accepted this, but Mishkenot Yakov<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&st=&pgnum=124 Mishkenot Yakov 121 s.v. hayotzei] rejects this because there are gaps more than 10 amot.</ref> and Chazon Ish<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=321 Chazon Ish 112:5 s.v. vbchazon] writes that a gap of more than 10 for rabbanan or 13.3 amot for Rabbi Yehuda is deoritta when making pasi biraot. However, if there is omed merubeh then a gap of ten is only derabbanan.</ref> reject this concept for different reasons.
##If there were ''pasi biraot'' surrounding the city, according to the rabbanan, according to the Bet Efraim, the entire town is a reshut hayachid and a tzurat hapetach eruv works. Avnei Nezer accepted this, but Mishkenot Yakov<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&st=&pgnum=124 Mishkenot Yakov 121 s.v. hayotzei] rejects this because there are gaps more than 10 amot.</ref> and Chazon Ish<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=321 Chazon Ish 112:5 s.v. vbchazon] writes that a gap of more than 10 for rabbanan or 13.3 amot for Rabbi Yehuda is deoritta when making pasi biraot. However, if there is omed merubeh then a gap of ten is only derabbanan.</ref> reject this concept for different reasons.
Line 132: Line 132:
#It is permitted to carry from a private or public domain to an exempt area or from an exempt area to a private or public domain. However, one may not carry from a private domain to a public domain through an exempt area or visa versa. Similarly, one may not stand in an exempt area and transfer an item from a private domain to a public domain via the exempt area or visa versa.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 346:1</ref>
#It is permitted to carry from a private or public domain to an exempt area or from an exempt area to a private or public domain. However, one may not carry from a private domain to a public domain through an exempt area or visa versa. Similarly, one may not stand in an exempt area and transfer an item from a private domain to a public domain via the exempt area or visa versa.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 346:1</ref>
#There is a dispute whether it is permitted to stand in an exempt area and transfer an item from a private domain to a Karmelit or visa versa. Similarly, there is a dispute whether it is permitted to carry from a private domain to a Karmelit or Karmelit to a private domain via an exempt area. Many poskim write that one should be strict about this case.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 346:1 quotes two opinions on the matter. Birkei Yosef 346:1 explains that Shulchan Aruch rules like the lenient opinion. The Rama 372:6 is strict on the matter. Kaf Hachaim 346:17 writes that one should be strict in order to satisfy both opinions quoted in Shulchan Aruch, but that if the item was placed down in the exempt area before being transferred there is room to be lenient. </ref>
#There is a dispute whether it is permitted to stand in an exempt area and transfer an item from a private domain to a Karmelit or visa versa. Similarly, there is a dispute whether it is permitted to carry from a private domain to a Karmelit or Karmelit to a private domain via an exempt area. Many poskim write that one should be strict about this case.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 346:1 quotes two opinions on the matter. Birkei Yosef 346:1 explains that Shulchan Aruch rules like the lenient opinion. The Rama 372:6 is strict on the matter. Kaf Hachaim 346:17 writes that one should be strict in order to satisfy both opinions quoted in Shulchan Aruch, but that if the item was placed down in the exempt area before being transferred there is room to be lenient. </ref>
==Modern Day Eruv==
#Many poskim hold that it is permissible to carry on Shabbat within an eruv. However, some poskim disagree and wouldn't allow carrying in any eruv. Sephardim are initially strict not to carry in an eruv when possible but have what to rely upon to be lenient if there is a serious need to carry within the eruv.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 345:4. For background see [[Introduction to the Modern Eruv]].</ref>
==Tzurat Hapetach==
#Most poskim are stringent not to allow if there is one post of the tzurat hapetach is inside of a four-walled area. If there is only one wall separating between the two polls that is a dispute if it is kosher.<ref>The Netivot in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=41113&st=&pgnum=2 Tikkun Eruvin] writes that you can’t make a tzurat hapetach with one kaneh that is enclosed in an area surrounded by four walls. He presents two reasons. 1) A tzurat hapetach needs to be recognizable and if it is inside another area it isn’t recognizable. 2) The reshut hayachid is considered completely filled up and the kaneh is like it doesn’t count. Shaarei Teshuva 363:7 quotes this. MB 363:113 agrees. Avnei Nezer OC 291 accepts the Tikkun Eruvin’s point for another reason because he disagrees with both reasons of the Tikkun Eruvin. He says that it is like the kaneh that in the reshut hayachid is like it is separated from the other kaneh. Chazon Ish 70:22 writes this idea for the Tikkun Eruvin. Chazon Ish is also machmir even if it is behind one wall.</ref>
==Natural Slopes==
<center><gallery widths="250px" heights="130px" mode="nolines">
Image:Tel_hamelaket_24.png|Picture 1: Slope according to majority of ''poskim''
Image:Tel_hamelaket_22.png|Picture 2: Slope according to minority view
Image:Tel hamelaket 18-6.png|Picture 3: Slope that becomes more gradual
Image:Tel_hamelaket_12-6-6.png|Picture 4: Slope with break in middle
</gallery></center>
===Angle of the Slope===
#A slope that that has a height of 10 tefachim over a distance of 4 amot or less<ref>Sfat Emet (Shababt 100a s.v. amar rav)</ref> is considered a wall for enclosing a reshut hayachid.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 100a, Rambam Shabbat 14:16, Shulchan Aruch and Rama O.C. 363:36, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 362:2</ref> According to majority of poskim, this distance is measured along the slope and not the floor (Picture #1), however, a minority of poskim hold it is measured along the ground (Picture #2).<ref>Rabbenu Chananel (Shabbat 100b), Ritva (Shabbat 100a s.v. tel, Eruvin 19b s.v. tel), and Riaz (Eruvin 2:1:7) hold that 4 amot is measured along the slope, while Tosfot Zevachim (63a s.v kol) holds that 4 amot is measured along the ground. Goan Yakov (Eruvin 19b), Mishna Brurah 345:5, 363:154, Aruch Hashulchan 345:28, Maharalbach 19, and Netivot Shabbat 16:6 hold like Rabbenu Chananel. Mahalbach explains that this is also the view of Rashi Eruvin 19b and Rambam Shabbat 14:16. Markevet Hamishna explains Rambam like Tosfot. Sfat Emet Shabbat 100a says Rashi agrees with Rabbenu Chananel. (There Tosfot write that a slope of a triangle with height 9 and floor 20 is steeper than a tel hamelaket. According to Rabbenu Chananel it isn’t true.) if 4 amot is measured on the floor then the angle of the slope is arctan(10/24)=22.6 degrees. If 4 amot is measured on the slope then the angle of the slope is arcsin(10/24)=24.6 degrees.</ref> A tel hamelaket has the halacha of gud asik.<ref>Rashi Eruvin 15a s.v. gevoha, Machaneh Yisrael (12:16:5 p.293), Netivot Shabbat ch. 16 fnt. 19. See Rav Chaim Halevi on Rambam Sukkah 11:4 who suggests that Rambam doesn't hold of gud asik but, nonetheless, the top of the tel hamelaket is a reshut hayachid that extends upward. Chazon Ish 108:9 implies that there is no gud asik for the slope of the tel hamelaket.</ref>
#A slope that is more gradual than 10 tefachim within 4 amot, such as 10 tefachim over 5 amot, is not considered a wall.<ref>Rashi Shabbat 100a s.v. tel writes that if the slope is more gradual than 10 tefachim within 4 amot it is like the ground of the reshut harabbim since people can walk over it easily. Taz 363:28 and Mishna Brurah 363:154 quote Rashi. Chazon Ish (65:70 s.v. achrei) suggests that an area that is raised up or lower 10 tefachim than the area next to it, it could be a reshut hayachid, since it is set off from the reshut harabbim even though the slope is more gradual than 10 amot within 4 amot. This is true on condition that people don't walk over the walls. For example, if there is a house with walls that are sloped more gradually than 10 amot within 4 amot, it is a reshut hayachid inside since people don't walk over the walls. His proof is Sukkah 19a. Netivot Shabbat ch. 6 fnt. 17 notes that the implication of the poskim is unlike this Chazon Ish.</ref>
#The slope is considered a wall where it reaches 10 tefachim within 4 amot. The top of the slope is where it is considered to be a the wall and not the bottom of the slope.<ref>Rashi Shabbat 100a s.v. tel and s.v. otto. Machaneh Yisrael (12:18 p. 294) writes that only the top of the slope where it reaches 10 tefachim within 4 amot is considered a wall and not the bottom of the slope.</ref>
#Once the slope is 10 tefachim high within 4 amot, the area that slopes above it is considered within the walls of a reshut hayachid.<ref>Maharshal (Shabbat 100a s.v. bdibur hamatchil tel) explains that Rashi holds that even the slope is also considered a reshut hayachid once the slope reaches 10 tefachim high within 4 amot of distance. Avnei Nezer OC 291:15 explains that there is gud asik on a tel hamelaket even on the slope once it is ten tefachim.</ref> Some argue that it isn't a reshut hayachid until the area flattens out on top.<ref>Chazon Ish 108:9. Tosfot Shabbat 5b s.v. kotel writes that a slanted wall which is less than 10 tefachim from the ground is considered like a reshut harabbim only if people place items on top of it. Tosfot implies that people didn't use the slanted wall, it would be considered a karmelit according to its dimensions. Ramban disagrees and argues that a slanted  wall is like a straight wall and the side of it is considered airspace of the reshut harabbim. Rashba defends Tosfot by saying that the side of a wall is the airspace of a reshut harabbim, but a slanted wall is considered a new domain since there is a place upon it to place items. Chazon Ish applies this discussion to a slope of a tel hamelaket above 10 tefachim. According to Ramban, since it is like a wall, the surface is considered the airspace of the domain below. In practice it would be a makom patur since it is 10 tefachim above a reshut harabbim. Even though according to Tosfot it seems that the slope is considered a new domain and should be a reshut hayachid, Chazon Ish explains that isn't the case. Tosfot fundamentally agrees with Ramban, though he considers the sloped wall to be a new domain since no one can walk below it and can't be called airspace. However, above ten tefachim where walking below it is irrelevant Tosfot agrees with Ramban. Machaneh Yisrael (12:16:5 p. 293) rejects Chazon Ish's conclusion because it is against the Rashba and also Ritva Eruvin 90a. Machaneh Yisrael holds like Maharshal. Netivot Shabbat ch. 16 fnt. 19 quotes the dispute between Maharshal and Chazon Ish.</ref>
===If Slope Becomes Gradual in Middle===
#If the slope becomes more gradual in the middle but altogether over 4 amot it reaches a height of 10 tefachim (Picture #3), many poskim hold it is considered a wall. The main point is that as a whole the area of 4 amot has a slope that rises 10 tefachim but it is irrelevant what the slope is at any point.<ref>Tosefet Shabbat 345:2, Sfat Emet (Shabbat 100a s.v. amar rav). Mishna Brurah (Biur Halacha 358:2 s.v. v'im) seems to also be other this opinion as he compares two vertical walls split by some horizontal distance to be a wall if altogether it is 10 tefachim tall over 4 amot. </ref> Other poskim hold that this would not constitute a wall. Any part of the slope which is more gradual than 24.6 degrees is not considered a wall at all is a break in the wall. If the break is larger than 4 tefachim it breaks up the two parts of the slope completely.<ref>Chazon Ish 65:62 and 111:4 writes that if at any point if the slope it becomes more gradual than 24.6 degrees that part is not considered part of the slope and would break it up if it is wider than 3 tefachim. That is true even if altogether the slope is 10 tefachim tall within 4 amot. However, in 65:70 he prefers the logic that it would be a wall unless it is broken up with an area of 4 tefachim. In 111:4 he also uses the width of 4 tefachim. Netivot Shabbat 16:8 codifies the Chazon Ish, though in footnote he notes Tosefet Shabbat and Biur Halacha's view.</ref>
===Two Slopes Broken Up===
#If the slope is broken up with a width of more than 4 tefachim (Picture #4), even though each slope is at least 24.6 degrees, some poskim it doesn't join together,<ref>Chazon Ish 65:62 and 70</ref> while others hold it can join together.<ref>Gra 358:2, Biur Halacha 358:2 s.v. v'im. Trumat Hadeshen cited by Rama 358:2 writes that a 9.5 tefach wall of dirt of a width of 4 tefachim next to a 19 tefach stone wall is considered as though the dirt wall is a new ground and the stone wall is broken since it isn't 10 tefachim above the dirt wall. Gra 358:2 argues that the two walls should combine, even though there is a flat ground of 4 tefachim on top of the dirt wall between them. Biur Halacha 358:2 s.v. v'im writes that everyone should agree that the walls can combine as long as altogether there is a height of 10 tefachim within 4 amot. Chazon Ish notes that his argument is against Gra. Biur Halacha 362:2 s.v. sh'asa suggests that this is the dispute between Trumat Hadeshen and Gra.</ref>
#If there is a slope that is 5 tefachim within 2 amot or less and a wall of 5 tefachim on top of it, some say that it isn't a wall, but others argue that it is a wall.<ref>Biur Halacha 362:2 s.v. tel isn't sure about this case because perhaps only a slope that altogether with 10 tefachim tall constitutes a wall. On the other hand, it the slope of 5 tefachim could be a partial wall and joins together with the vertical wall of 5 tefachim. </ref> If there is a slope with less than 3 tefachim of height and a wall of the remaining height to reach 10 tefachim, it is questionable if that is considered a wall.<ref>Biur Halacha 362:2 s.v. tel isn't sure if this type of slope can join together with a wall, since the slope is less than 3 tefachim tall it is like part of the ground of the reshut harabbim. If so, the wall on top is ineffective unless it itself is 10 tefachim tall.</ref>
===Stairs===
#If the stairs are less than the width of 3 tefachim and less than 3 tefachim wall they can become a wall if altogether there is a height of 10 tefachim within 4 amot. If they are different dimensions see footnote.<ref>Netivot Shabbat 16:9 writes that stairs which are 3 tefachim or less wide and 3 tefachim or less tall are considered a wall. He compares this to a tel hamelaket since it rises 10 tefachim within 4 amot and even though it isn’t a flat slope since each aberration is less than lavud and it is like a flat slope. According to the analysis of Kovetz Teshuvot 4:33 the following emerges:
*If the stairs are a width of 4 tefachim according to Trumat Hadeshen (cited by Rama 358:2) and Chazon Ish 65:70 it isn't considered a wall, but according to the Gra it is considered a wall.
*If the stairs aren't 4 tefachim wide, it is considered a wall according to Chazon Ish, but possibly not a wall according to Rav Elyashiv.
*If the stairs are less than the width of 3 tefachim, according to Trumat Hadeshen, Chazon Ish, and Rav Elyashiv it is a wall.
*Rav Elyashiv writes that an eruv should not be lenient on this question. See Chashukei Chemed Shabbat 100a where he writes that stairs can count as a wall as long as it is 10 tefachim within 4 amot, but does not specify any of the above conditions.</ref>
#A separate issue that some poskim raise regarding counting stairs as a wall is that the wall is trampled (nidreset). Many aren't concerned about this issue.<ref>In terms of nidreset, Chatom Sofer OC 1:89 holds that it isn’t an issue because we pasken like rabbanan in Eruvin 22a. Chazon Ish 108:13 holds that nidreset is never an issue with a real wall and a borrowed phrase out of context. Imrei Yosher 1:2 holds that nidreset is an issue to mevatel walls completely. Dirshu 358:20 applies his opinion to stairs to be machmir. Netivot Shabbat (ch. 16 fnt. 24) regarding stairs quotes Rav Yechezkel Roth that we’re concerned for mechitza nidreset and we cannot count stairs as a wall. However, Rav Friedman argued with him based on the Chatom Sofer and Chazon Ish. Kovetz Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:33) writes that it is an issue if the stairs are 3 or 4 tefachim wide because we should be concerned for the opinion of the Trumat Hadeshen. He doesn’t raise the issue of mechitza nidreset.</ref>
==Defining the act of carrying==
==Defining the act of carrying==


Line 182: Line 141:


==Carrying a child==
==Carrying a child==
 
#It is permitted for a person to hold one's baby for support while they walk in the reshut harabbim. Furthermore, it is even permitted to pick up one leg of the baby at a time since the baby keeps one leg on the ground. It is forbidden to drag a baby because that is like carrying.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:41</ref>
#It is forbidden to carry a baby or child even if he is able to walk even in a Karmalit.<ref>Biur Halacha 308:41 s.v. shelo forbids it as does Igrot Moshe OC 2:33. See Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1:28.</ref> However, one shouldn't tell people who do this because certainly they will not listen and its better that they do so unintentionally rather than violate [[Shabbat]] intentionally.<ref>Mishna Brurah 308:154, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 82:10</ref>
#It is forbidden to carry a baby or child even if he is able to walk even in a Karmalit.<ref>Biur Halacha 308:41 s.v. shelo forbids it as does Igrot Moshe OC 2:33. See Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1:28.</ref> However, one shouldn't tell people who do this because certainly they will not listen and its better that they do so unintentionally rather than violate [[Shabbat]] intentionally.<ref>Mishna Brurah 308:154, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 82:10</ref> On the other hand, if there is a chance that others will listen, then one should tell them<ref>Mishna Berurah 508:3</ref>, as well as one should publicize this prohibition<ref>Igros Moshe YD 2:33</ref>.


==What is considered a garment?==
==What is considered a garment?==
Line 227: Line 186:
[[Category:Shabbat]]
[[Category:Shabbat]]
[[Category:Eruvin]]
[[Category:Eruvin]]
{{Shabbat Table}}
Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,200

edits