3,438
edits
Techum: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
==Moving Packages Received on Shabbat== | ==Moving Packages Received on Shabbat== | ||
# If one isn't sure if an item was brought from beyond the techum one | # If one isn't sure if an item was brought from beyond the techum on Shabbos, one may not to move it beyond 4 amot even though techum is rabbinic.<Ref>Beitzah 24b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 515:1</ref> | ||
# Even if the package was delivered from outside of the techum if the package was placed in a house or building then it can be moved within the house since the house walls are considered 4 amot.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 405:1 writes that people who leave the techum only have 4 amot. Shulchan Aruch 405:9 applies these laws to objects as well. Shulchan Aruch 405:6 writes that if a person left the techum accidentally or was forcibly was moved by non-Jews and ended up beyond the techum within a walled area the entire walled area is considered like 4 amot. However, if a Jew left the techum intentionally he only has 4 amot. However, with respect to objects that left the techum, Mishna Brurah 405:50 writes that if the objects left the techum and entered a walled area they can be moved within the entire walled area whether they were moved there intentionally or unintentionally.</ref> | # Even if the package was delivered from outside of the techum if the package was placed in a house or building then it can be moved within the house since the house walls are considered 4 amot.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 405:1 writes that people who leave the techum only have 4 amot. Shulchan Aruch 405:9 applies these laws to objects as well. Shulchan Aruch 405:6 writes that if a person left the techum accidentally or was forcibly was moved by non-Jews and ended up beyond the techum within a walled area the entire walled area is considered like 4 amot. However, if a Jew left the techum intentionally he only has 4 amot. However, with respect to objects that left the techum, Mishna Brurah 405:50 writes that if the objects left the techum and entered a walled area they can be moved within the entire walled area whether they were moved there intentionally or unintentionally.</ref> | ||
#If a package was delivered from outside the techum on Shabbat for a Jew he cannot benefit from it on Shabbat or even after Shabbat the time it would take to bring it from beyond the techum. He is allowed to move the package up within 4 amot or if it is in a building within the walls of the building.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 325:8. Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions about whether he must wait until the time it takes to bring it from beyond the techum in order to eat it. Mishna Brurah 325:40 implies that he is strict about this question, though he doesn't require waiting until Sunday morning the time it takes to deliver it from beyond the techum like the opinion Rama quotes.</ref> | #If a package was delivered from outside the techum on Shabbat for a Jew he cannot benefit from it on Shabbat or even after Shabbat the time it would take to bring it from beyond the techum. He is allowed to move the package up within 4 amot or if it is in a building within the walls of the building.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 325:8. Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions about whether he must wait until the time it takes to bring it from beyond the techum in order to eat it. Mishna Brurah 325:40 implies that he is strict about this question, though he doesn't require waiting until Sunday morning the time it takes to deliver it from beyond the techum like the opinion Rama quotes.</ref> | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
# One may walk to one's garden within the techum in order to pick fruit after [[Shabbat]] since it is not evident that one is walking there for that purpose.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 90:3</ref> | # One may walk to one's garden within the techum in order to pick fruit after [[Shabbat]] since it is not evident that one is walking there for that purpose.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 90:3</ref> | ||
== | ==Techum above Ten Tefachim== | ||
# There is an unresolved discussion in the Gemara whether there is techum above ten tefachim. We are lenient if a person started Shabbat above ten tefachim that he doesn't have a techum of two thousand amot as long as he didn't yet land or reach a place that is connected to the ground.<ref>Gemara Eruvin 43a-b, Shulchan Aruch OC 404:1</ref> This is relevant to a person who was on a boat at the beginning of Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 404:1</ref> | # There is an unresolved discussion in the Gemara whether there is techum above ten tefachim. We are lenient if a person started Shabbat above ten tefachim that he doesn't have a techum of two thousand amot as long as he didn't yet land or reach a place that is connected to the ground.<ref>Gemara Eruvin 43a-b, Shulchan Aruch OC 404:1</ref> This is relevant to a person who was on a boat at the beginning of Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 404:1</ref> | ||
# A wagon is considered within ten tefachim of the ground since the wheels rest on the ground and the wagon itself if bigger than 4 tefachim.<ref>Shoel Umeishiv 5:3</ref> | # A wagon is considered within ten tefachim of the ground since the wheels rest on the ground and the wagon itself if bigger than 4 tefachim.<ref>Shoel Umeishiv 5:3</ref> | ||
== | ==Techum of Property== | ||
# A barrel that belongs to two people that was split up on Yom Tov, each part has the techum of the owner of that half even though it was only split up on Yom Tov.<ref> The Gemara Beitzah 37b records a dispute between Rav and Shmuel whether we hold of the concept of berierah. Berierah is that we can view an eventual decision as though it already happened to clarify what is the case now. Rav holds of it and Shmuel does not. The gemara’s conclusion (38a) is that for derabbanan concepts we hold of Berierah. This is codified by the Rambam (Yom Tov 5:20) and Shulchan Aruch 397:10.</ref> | # A barrel that belongs to two people that was split up on Yom Tov, each part has the techum of the owner of that half even though it was only split up on Yom Tov.<ref> The Gemara Beitzah 37b records a dispute between Rav and Shmuel whether we hold of the concept of berierah. Berierah is that we can view an eventual decision as though it already happened to clarify what is the case now. Rav holds of it and Shmuel does not. The gemara’s conclusion (38a) is that for derabbanan concepts we hold of Berierah. This is codified by the Rambam (Yom Tov 5:20) and Shulchan Aruch 397:10.</ref> | ||
==Boats== | ==Boats== | ||
