Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Shabbos 66

1) HALACHAH: GOING TO "RESHUS HA'RABIM" WITH CRUTCHES ON SHABBOS

May a person walk in Reshus ha'Rabim with crutches on Shabbos? Are crutches considered tools that a person is *carrying*, and prohibited, or are they considered a piece of apparel, and permitted to be taken into Reshus ha'Rabim?

The Shulchan Aruch O.C. 301:17 distinguishes between two situations:

1) A person who cannot walk without using a crutch is permitted to use crutches in Reshus haRabim, as they are considered garments like shoes (Mishnah Berurah #63)
2) A person who is able to walk without crutches but uses crutches to assist in walking is not permitted to use his crutches in Reshus ha'Rabim. They are considered a Masuy.

The Mishnah Berurah (#64) writes that if a person walks without using a cane when at home and only uses it when he walks outside, he falls into category #2 above. However, Mishnah Berurah #65 quotes the Taz that if a person has difficulty walking and must use a stick in wet or icy conditions, he is in category #1, and permitted to use a cane in Reshus ha'Rabim. The Mishnah Berurah himself argues, citing several Acharonim who disagree with the Taz and are stringent in this situation, but the Aruch Hashulchan (301:70) agrees with the Taz and permits the use of a cane in icy conditions.

The Shulchan Aruch 301:18 writes that a blind person may not go out with his cane. Mishnah Berurah explains that since the blind person can walk unaided and the cane is only used to steady himself, he is in category #2. The Aruch haShulchan 302:72 limits the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch to a situation when the blind person is walking in a familiar area. When he is in a strange place. he is unable to walk unless he has his cane to feel ahead for obstacles. It is therefore permitted for him to carry a cane, as he falls into category #1.

QUESTION: Abaye and Rava argue whether the wooden foot of an amputee can become Tamei with Tum'as Midras or not. Tum'as Midras is conveyed by sitting, standing, or leaning on an article that is made for sitting, standing or leaning on. Abaye and Rav disagree as to whether the wooden leg is made for one of those uses.

What is their argument based on? If an amputee stands on the wooden foot which is affixed to his leg, of course it is made for standing upon. Hy should it not be Mekabel Tum'as Midras?

ANSWER: TOSFOS (65b, DH ha'Kitei'a), the RITVA, and other Rishonim answer that the amputee does not walk on the wooden stump. The wooden stump is there primarily for cosmetic purposes. It is only leaned upon on occasion, for instance when the amputee is seated. On what does the amputee walk? (a) The amputee walks with crutches and he does not lean on the leg enough for it to be considered something that is made for leaning on. (b) Alternatively, a wooden rod is tied to the bent knee of the amputee, and it is on that rod that he walks. The wooden foot is meant to merely cover his stump which protrudes behind him as he walks.

66b

QUESTION: The Mishnah says that Luktemin are Tahor. In the Gemara, Rava (or Rafram) bar Papa says that Luktemin are "Keshiri," which Rashi explains to mean, "stilts that are used for walking through mud to keep one's feet clean." As Rashi asks, why should these stilts should be Tahor if they are used for walking upon? They should be Tamei with Tum'as Midras!

ANSWERS:

(a) TOSFOS (DH Keshiri) cites the RI who says that they are not Tamei with Tum'as Midras because they are not used for normal walking, but only to go through mud. The Ri seems to be consistent with his opinion elsewhere (see Tosfos 66a, DH v'Ha and DH Tamei), where he says that something worn only to protect the feet or to protect the shoes is not considered something that is walked or stood upon. In order to be Mekabel Tum'as Midras, is must be made for the purpose of normal walking, standing, or sitting upon, and not for "special purpose" walking, standing, or sitting.

The RITVA explains that the Ri means that if an object is made for *walking* upon (rather than standing or sitting upon), it is not Mekabel Tum'as Midras -- unless it is in the form of a shoe (such as a Sandal Shel Sayadin, see 66a).

(b) TOSFOS cites the ARUCH who explains that Keshiri are tall stilts made for entertainment purposes. Since the person walks fine without the stilts, and the purpose of the stilts is only to entertain onlookers and not to enhance walking, they are not Mekabel Tum'as Midras.