Eruvin - Revision history

YitzchakSultan1: /* Angle of the Slope */

2025-04-27T22:06:18Z

Angle of the Slope

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:06, 27 April 2025
Line 68:		Line 68:
	===Angle of the Slope===		===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 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>		#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 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>		#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 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>

YitzchakSultan1: /* Two Slopes Broken Up */

2025-04-27T16:04:10Z

Two Slopes Broken Up

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:04, 27 April 2025
Line 80:		Line 80:

	#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 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>		#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 is 10 tefachim tall constitutes a wall. On the other hand, perhaps the slope of 5 tefachim is 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===		===Stairs===

YitzchakSultan1: /* Tzurat Hapetach */

2023-08-01T03:56:05Z

Tzurat Hapetach

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:56, 1 August 2023
Line 10:		Line 10:
	# It is permitted to set up four walls of a tzurat hapetach to enclose a residential area.<ref>Pri Megadim MZ 363:1 has an unresolved question whether a tzurat hapetach is valid from the Torah or derabbanan. Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v. kshkol tries to prove that this is a dispute between the Ri and Rabbenu Chananel. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:13] holds that the tzurat hapetach is valid m'deoritta (excluding the issue of ayti rabbim).</ref> However, for an uninhabited valley it is invalid.<ref>Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v.aval is lenient on uninhabited valley if it is only 10 or less. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:11] machmir.</ref>		# It is permitted to set up four walls of a tzurat hapetach to enclose a residential area.<ref>Pri Megadim MZ 363:1 has an unresolved question whether a tzurat hapetach is valid from the Torah or derabbanan. Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v. kshkol tries to prove that this is a dispute between the Ri and Rabbenu Chananel. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:13] holds that the tzurat hapetach is valid m'deoritta (excluding the issue of ayti rabbim).</ref> However, for an uninhabited valley it is invalid.<ref>Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v.aval is lenient on uninhabited valley if it is only 10 or less. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:11] machmir.</ref>
	# Four walls made of tzurot hapetach aren't effective for a reshut harabbim because of the issue of ''ayti rabbim,'' conceptually "the masses come and knock down the tzurat hapetach."<Ref>Eruvin 6b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 364:2</ref>		# Four walls made of tzurot hapetach aren't effective for a reshut harabbim because of the issue of ''ayti rabbim,'' conceptually "the masses come and knock down the tzurat hapetach."<Ref>Eruvin 6b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 364:2</ref>
	#Wire should directly over the sideposts without anything separating between the sidepost and the wire.<Ref>Taz 363:19 holds that if there's a roof between the lechi and the kaneh on top it is an invalid tzurat hapetach. Tosefet Shabbos 363:64 disagrees and allows it. Mishna Brurah 363:112, Shulchan Aruch Harav 363:32, ~~and~~ Chazon Ish 71:13 accept Taz. Rav Dovid Feinstein (Vdibarta Bam v. 2 p. 289) holds that in extenuating circumstances at least for derabbanan purposes it is possible to follow Tosefet Shabbat unlike Taz. Chazon Ish 71:13 implies that if the roof was small and not 4 amot long it isn't a hefsek.</ref>		#Wire should directly over the sideposts without anything separating between the sidepost and the wire.<Ref>Taz 363:19 holds that if there's a roof between the lechi and the kaneh on top it is an invalid tzurat hapetach. Tosefet Shabbos 363:64 disagrees and allows it. Mishna Brurah 363:112, Shulchan Aruch Harav 363:32, Chazon Ish 71:13, and Kaf Hachaim 363:189 accept Taz. Rav Dovid Feinstein (Vdibarta Bam v. 2 p. 289) holds that in extenuating circumstances at least for derabbanan purposes it is possible to follow Tosefet Shabbat unlike Taz. Chazon Ish 71:13 implies that if the roof was small and not 4 amot long it isn't a hefsek.</ref>
	===Doorpost behind a Wall===		===Doorpost behind a Wall===
	#Most poskim are stringent not to allow a tzurat hapetach if one side post is inside of a four-walled area.<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. Mishna Brurah 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. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=223 Chazon Ish 70:22] writes this idea to explain the Tikkun Eruvin.</ref>		#Most poskim are stringent not to allow a tzurat hapetach if one side post is inside of a four-walled area.<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. Mishna Brurah 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. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=223 Chazon Ish 70:22] writes this idea to explain the Tikkun Eruvin.</ref>

YitzchakSultan1: /* Tzurat Hapetach */

2023-08-01T03:54:20Z

Tzurat Hapetach

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:54, 1 August 2023
Line 10:		Line 10:
	# It is permitted to set up four walls of a tzurat hapetach to enclose a residential area.<ref>Pri Megadim MZ 363:1 has an unresolved question whether a tzurat hapetach is valid from the Torah or derabbanan. Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v. kshkol tries to prove that this is a dispute between the Ri and Rabbenu Chananel. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:13] holds that the tzurat hapetach is valid m'deoritta (excluding the issue of ayti rabbim).</ref> However, for an uninhabited valley it is invalid.<ref>Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v.aval is lenient on uninhabited valley if it is only 10 or less. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:11] machmir.</ref>		# It is permitted to set up four walls of a tzurat hapetach to enclose a residential area.<ref>Pri Megadim MZ 363:1 has an unresolved question whether a tzurat hapetach is valid from the Torah or derabbanan. Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v. kshkol tries to prove that this is a dispute between the Ri and Rabbenu Chananel. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:13] holds that the tzurat hapetach is valid m'deoritta (excluding the issue of ayti rabbim).</ref> However, for an uninhabited valley it is invalid.<ref>Biur Halacha 362:10 s.v.aval is lenient on uninhabited valley if it is only 10 or less. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=221 Chazon Ish 70:11] machmir.</ref>
	# Four walls made of tzurot hapetach aren't effective for a reshut harabbim because of the issue of ''ayti rabbim,'' conceptually "the masses come and knock down the tzurat hapetach."<Ref>Eruvin 6b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 364:2</ref>		# Four walls made of tzurot hapetach aren't effective for a reshut harabbim because of the issue of ''ayti rabbim,'' conceptually "the masses come and knock down the tzurat hapetach."<Ref>Eruvin 6b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 364:2</ref>
			#Wire should directly over the sideposts without anything separating between the sidepost and the wire.<Ref>Taz 363:19 holds that if there's a roof between the lechi and the kaneh on top it is an invalid tzurat hapetach. Tosefet Shabbos 363:64 disagrees and allows it. Mishna Brurah 363:112, Shulchan Aruch Harav 363:32, and Chazon Ish 71:13 accept Taz. Rav Dovid Feinstein (Vdibarta Bam v. 2 p. 289) holds that in extenuating circumstances at least for derabbanan purposes it is possible to follow Tosefet Shabbat unlike Taz. Chazon Ish 71:13 implies that if the roof was small and not 4 amot long it isn't a hefsek.</ref>
	===Doorpost behind a Wall===		===Doorpost behind a Wall===
	#Most poskim are stringent not to allow a tzurat hapetach if one side post is inside of a four-walled area.<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. Mishna Brurah 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. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=223 Chazon Ish 70:22] writes this idea to explain the Tikkun Eruvin.</ref>		#Most poskim are stringent not to allow a tzurat hapetach if one side post is inside of a four-walled area.<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. Mishna Brurah 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. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=223 Chazon Ish 70:22] writes this idea to explain the Tikkun Eruvin.</ref>

YitzchakSultan1: /* Doorpost behind a Wall */

2023-08-01T03:19:17Z

Doorpost behind a Wall

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:19, 1 August 2023
Line 12:		Line 12:

	===Doorpost behind a Wall===		===Doorpost behind a Wall===
	#Most poskim are stringent not to allow a tzurat hapetach if one side post is inside of a four-walled area~~. If there is only one wall separating between the two poles 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. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=223 Chazon Ish 70:22] writes this idea to explain the Tikkun Eruvin. Chazon Ish is also machmir even if it is behind one wall.</ref>		#Most poskim are stringent not to allow a tzurat hapetach if one side post is inside of a four-walled area.<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. Mishna Brurah 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. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&st=&pgnum=223 Chazon Ish 70:22] writes this idea to explain the Tikkun Eruvin.</ref>
			#If there is only one wall separating between the two poles that is a dispute if it is kosher.<Ref>Chazon Ish 70:22 is also machmir even if it is behind one wall. Mishnat Yaakov pp. 115-116 writes that a tzurat hapetach with one wall blocking the tzurat hapetach is kosher according to Mekor Chaim, Chatom Sofer, and Mishna Brurah, but Chazon Ish has a safek about it in 70:18.</ref>

	===Uneven Doorposts===		===Uneven Doorposts===

YitzchakSultan1: /* Angle of the Slope */

2023-07-18T20:57:42Z

Angle of the Slope

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:57, 18 July 2023
Line 70:		Line 70:
	#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>		#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 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>		#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 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>		#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 Slope Becomes Gradual in Middle===

YitzchakSultan1 at 16:52, 13 July 2023

2023-07-13T16:52:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:52, 13 July 2023
Line 110:		Line 110:
	[[Category:Shabbat]]		[[Category:Shabbat]]
	[[Category:Eruvin]]		[[Category:Eruvin]]
			{{Shabbat Table}}

YitzchakSultan1: /* Sources */

2023-07-13T01:57:46Z

Sources

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:57, 13 July 2023
Line 108:		Line 108:
	==Sources==		==Sources==
	<references/>		<references/>
			[[Category:Shabbat]]
			[[Category:Eruvin]]

YitzchakSultan1 at 01:55, 13 July 2023

2023-07-13T01:55:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:55, 13 July 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In many cities around the world there are communal eruvin in order to allow Jews to carry outside on Shabbat. In order to establish an eruv 4 steps are necessary: (1) First, it is necessary to establish that the city in question is suitable to have an eruv and isn't considered a reshut harabbim. That can be accomplished in several ways such as by ensuring that there is a population less than 600,000 people, the area is surrounded by a majority of walls, or according to some opinions the streets aren't straight. This topic is discussed on the [[Hotzaah]] page. (2) Halachic walls need to be erected using a combination of buildings, fences, walls, bushes, and cliffs. The gaps or large areas with no walls need to be closed using tzurot hapetach, with a string over two poles. This is discussed on this page. (3) It is necessary to rent from the municipality or police the public areas for ritual purposes. This is called ''shechirut reshut'' and discussed on the [[~~Allowing_Carrying_Using_an_Eruv_Chatzerot#~~Sechirut_Reshut]] page. (4) A box of bread or matzah needs to be acquired to the Jews of the community and stored in a publicly accessible location. This is called an eruv chatzerot and discussed on the [[~~Allowing_Carrying_Using_an_Eruv_Chatzerot~~]] page. For a conceptual background to the topic of eruvin see [[Introduction to the Modern Eruv]].		In many cities around the world there are communal eruvin in order to allow Jews to carry outside on Shabbat. In order to establish an eruv 4 steps are necessary: (1) First, it is necessary to establish that the city in question is suitable to have an eruv and isn't considered a reshut harabbim. That can be accomplished in several ways such as by ensuring that there is a population less than 600,000 people, the area is surrounded by a majority of walls, or according to some opinions the streets aren't straight. This topic is discussed on the [[Hotzaah]] page. (2) Halachic walls need to be erected using a combination of buildings, fences, walls, bushes, and cliffs. The gaps or large areas with no walls need to be closed using tzurot hapetach, with a string over two poles. This is discussed on this page. (3) It is necessary to rent from the municipality or police the public areas for ritual purposes. This is called ''shechirut reshut'' and discussed on the [[Sechirut_Reshut]] page. (4) A box of bread or matzah needs to be acquired to the Jews of the community and stored in a publicly accessible location. This is called an eruv chatzerot and discussed on the [[Eruv_Chatzerot]] page. For a conceptual background to the topic of eruvin see [[Introduction to the Modern Eruv]].

	==Modern Day Eruv==		==Modern Day Eruv==

YitzchakSultan1: /* Modern Day Eruv */

2023-07-13T01:38:27Z

Modern Day Eruv

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:38, 13 July 2023
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Modern Day Eruv==		==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>		#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>
			#As long an area can be determined not to be a public domain on a biblical level, an eruv using tzurot hapetach, entranceways made with two polls and a lintel as thin as a string on top, suffice.<ref>Rav Hershel Schacter in "[[Introduction to the Modern Eruv]]"</ref>
			#See Rav Hershel Schachter's article on [[Introduction to the Modern Eruv]] and the [[Hotzah]] page for details about how to create the tzurat hapetach and the definitions of the 4 halachic domains.

	==Tzurat Hapetach==		==Tzurat Hapetach==