Is a car considered movable or immovable property? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InParashat Metzora+HagadolPesach/PassoverScratch on a car: liability if panel was later paid by another Car falls into my ditch- I'm not responsible?Why does a convert own his property?Playing music in the car with the windows openHitting a double-parked carVery small damage to someone else's propertyWhat recourse is available for someone whose property was seized by a creditor of the seller?Can you acquire land merely by using it?When is desiring another man's property permittedPaying damages for rerouting flood to neighbor's property

"as much details as you can remember"

Delete all lines which don't have n characters before delimiter

How to deal with fear of taking dependencies

How to type this arrow in math mode?

For what reasons would an animal species NOT cross a *horizontal* land bridge?

What could be the right powersource for 15 seconds lifespan disposable giant chainsaw?

Can someone be penalized for an "unlawful" act if no penalty is specified?

Is an up-to-date browser secure on an out-of-date OS?

Are there any other methods to apply to solving simultaneous equations?

What tool would a Roman-age civilization have for the breaking of silver and other metals into dust?

Shouldn't "much" here be used instead of "more"?

What is the closest word meaning "respect for time / mindful"

Can a flute soloist sit?

Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?

How to support a colleague who finds meetings extremely tiring?

When should I buy a clipper card after flying to OAK?

Is there a symbol for a right arrow with a square in the middle?

Apparent duplicates between Haynes service instructions and MOT

What do the Banks children have against barley water?

One word riddle: Vowel in the middle

Why can Shazam fly?

Deal with toxic manager when you can't quit

Is this app Icon Browser Safe/Legit?

What is the meaning of the verb "bear" in this context?



Is a car considered movable or immovable property?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Parashat Metzora+Hagadol
Pesach/PassoverScratch on a car: liability if panel was later paid by another Car falls into my ditch- I'm not responsible?Why does a convert own his property?Playing music in the car with the windows openHitting a double-parked carVery small damage to someone else's propertyWhat recourse is available for someone whose property was seized by a creditor of the seller?Can you acquire land merely by using it?When is desiring another man's property permittedPaying damages for rerouting flood to neighbor's property










1















The Mishnah (Kiddushin 1:5) differentiates between how one acquires movable and immovable property (translation follows Yachin):




נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת נִקְנִין בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְשֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, אֵין נִקְנִין אֶלָּא בִמְשִׁיכָה. נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, נִקְנִין עִם נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְזוֹקְקִין נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת אֶת הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת לִשָּׁבַע עֲלֵיהֶן:



Land is acquired with money, documents, or an act of ownership; movable property is only acquired by dragging it. Movable property can be acquired with land, with money, documents, or an act of ownership, and we stand up movable property with land to swear on them.




Ignoring Dina d’Malchusa considerations, how do things like cars factor into this? They can’t be picked up by ordinary means, but they can be driven. Is a car considered movable property, then, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered like dragging it? Or is a car considered real estate, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered an act of ownership? A practical difference between these approaches is whether one can acquire a car with a document or along with land.










share|improve this question



















  • 1





    would a car be equivalent to an animal that can be ridden?

    – rosends
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm certain that things like wagons are discussed in the Halachah. I'd assume that whatever the Halachah is for those would be the same for cars.

    – Salmononius2
    2 days ago











  • @rosends Not sure. The previous Mishnah gives different ways of acquiring animals; potentially they’re all forms of Meshichah and indicate that animals are no different than movable property, potentially they’re their own category, and potentially they’re considered immovable property and those are forms of Chazakah, not Meshichah. Gemara spends most of the time dealing with elephants, which certainly can’t be picked up, but I don’t see a clear proof one way or the other from them.

    – DonielF
    2 days ago











  • @DonielF The case with the elephant is considering it a movable object, seeing as right at the end it suggests a form of hagba’a (which can only be used on movable objects).

    – Lo ani
    2 days ago











  • Interesting yerushalmi sometimes quoted on this mishna

    – Dr. Shmuel
    2 days ago















1















The Mishnah (Kiddushin 1:5) differentiates between how one acquires movable and immovable property (translation follows Yachin):




נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת נִקְנִין בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְשֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, אֵין נִקְנִין אֶלָּא בִמְשִׁיכָה. נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, נִקְנִין עִם נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְזוֹקְקִין נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת אֶת הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת לִשָּׁבַע עֲלֵיהֶן:



Land is acquired with money, documents, or an act of ownership; movable property is only acquired by dragging it. Movable property can be acquired with land, with money, documents, or an act of ownership, and we stand up movable property with land to swear on them.




Ignoring Dina d’Malchusa considerations, how do things like cars factor into this? They can’t be picked up by ordinary means, but they can be driven. Is a car considered movable property, then, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered like dragging it? Or is a car considered real estate, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered an act of ownership? A practical difference between these approaches is whether one can acquire a car with a document or along with land.










share|improve this question



















  • 1





    would a car be equivalent to an animal that can be ridden?

    – rosends
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm certain that things like wagons are discussed in the Halachah. I'd assume that whatever the Halachah is for those would be the same for cars.

    – Salmononius2
    2 days ago











  • @rosends Not sure. The previous Mishnah gives different ways of acquiring animals; potentially they’re all forms of Meshichah and indicate that animals are no different than movable property, potentially they’re their own category, and potentially they’re considered immovable property and those are forms of Chazakah, not Meshichah. Gemara spends most of the time dealing with elephants, which certainly can’t be picked up, but I don’t see a clear proof one way or the other from them.

    – DonielF
    2 days ago











  • @DonielF The case with the elephant is considering it a movable object, seeing as right at the end it suggests a form of hagba’a (which can only be used on movable objects).

    – Lo ani
    2 days ago











  • Interesting yerushalmi sometimes quoted on this mishna

    – Dr. Shmuel
    2 days ago













1












1








1








The Mishnah (Kiddushin 1:5) differentiates between how one acquires movable and immovable property (translation follows Yachin):




נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת נִקְנִין בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְשֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, אֵין נִקְנִין אֶלָּא בִמְשִׁיכָה. נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, נִקְנִין עִם נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְזוֹקְקִין נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת אֶת הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת לִשָּׁבַע עֲלֵיהֶן:



Land is acquired with money, documents, or an act of ownership; movable property is only acquired by dragging it. Movable property can be acquired with land, with money, documents, or an act of ownership, and we stand up movable property with land to swear on them.




Ignoring Dina d’Malchusa considerations, how do things like cars factor into this? They can’t be picked up by ordinary means, but they can be driven. Is a car considered movable property, then, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered like dragging it? Or is a car considered real estate, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered an act of ownership? A practical difference between these approaches is whether one can acquire a car with a document or along with land.










share|improve this question
















The Mishnah (Kiddushin 1:5) differentiates between how one acquires movable and immovable property (translation follows Yachin):




נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת נִקְנִין בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְשֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, אֵין נִקְנִין אֶלָּא בִמְשִׁיכָה. נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, נִקְנִין עִם נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת, בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה. וְזוֹקְקִין נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת אֶת הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחֲרָיוּת לִשָּׁבַע עֲלֵיהֶן:



Land is acquired with money, documents, or an act of ownership; movable property is only acquired by dragging it. Movable property can be acquired with land, with money, documents, or an act of ownership, and we stand up movable property with land to swear on them.




Ignoring Dina d’Malchusa considerations, how do things like cars factor into this? They can’t be picked up by ordinary means, but they can be driven. Is a car considered movable property, then, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered like dragging it? Or is a car considered real estate, and one can acquire a car by driving it, which would be considered an act of ownership? A practical difference between these approaches is whether one can acquire a car with a document or along with land.







halacha choshen-mishpat-civil-law maseches-kiddushin






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









alicht

2,7011634




2,7011634










asked 2 days ago









DonielFDonielF

17.1k12690




17.1k12690







  • 1





    would a car be equivalent to an animal that can be ridden?

    – rosends
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm certain that things like wagons are discussed in the Halachah. I'd assume that whatever the Halachah is for those would be the same for cars.

    – Salmononius2
    2 days ago











  • @rosends Not sure. The previous Mishnah gives different ways of acquiring animals; potentially they’re all forms of Meshichah and indicate that animals are no different than movable property, potentially they’re their own category, and potentially they’re considered immovable property and those are forms of Chazakah, not Meshichah. Gemara spends most of the time dealing with elephants, which certainly can’t be picked up, but I don’t see a clear proof one way or the other from them.

    – DonielF
    2 days ago











  • @DonielF The case with the elephant is considering it a movable object, seeing as right at the end it suggests a form of hagba’a (which can only be used on movable objects).

    – Lo ani
    2 days ago











  • Interesting yerushalmi sometimes quoted on this mishna

    – Dr. Shmuel
    2 days ago












  • 1





    would a car be equivalent to an animal that can be ridden?

    – rosends
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm certain that things like wagons are discussed in the Halachah. I'd assume that whatever the Halachah is for those would be the same for cars.

    – Salmononius2
    2 days ago











  • @rosends Not sure. The previous Mishnah gives different ways of acquiring animals; potentially they’re all forms of Meshichah and indicate that animals are no different than movable property, potentially they’re their own category, and potentially they’re considered immovable property and those are forms of Chazakah, not Meshichah. Gemara spends most of the time dealing with elephants, which certainly can’t be picked up, but I don’t see a clear proof one way or the other from them.

    – DonielF
    2 days ago











  • @DonielF The case with the elephant is considering it a movable object, seeing as right at the end it suggests a form of hagba’a (which can only be used on movable objects).

    – Lo ani
    2 days ago











  • Interesting yerushalmi sometimes quoted on this mishna

    – Dr. Shmuel
    2 days ago







1




1





would a car be equivalent to an animal that can be ridden?

– rosends
2 days ago





would a car be equivalent to an animal that can be ridden?

– rosends
2 days ago




1




1





I'm certain that things like wagons are discussed in the Halachah. I'd assume that whatever the Halachah is for those would be the same for cars.

– Salmononius2
2 days ago





I'm certain that things like wagons are discussed in the Halachah. I'd assume that whatever the Halachah is for those would be the same for cars.

– Salmononius2
2 days ago













@rosends Not sure. The previous Mishnah gives different ways of acquiring animals; potentially they’re all forms of Meshichah and indicate that animals are no different than movable property, potentially they’re their own category, and potentially they’re considered immovable property and those are forms of Chazakah, not Meshichah. Gemara spends most of the time dealing with elephants, which certainly can’t be picked up, but I don’t see a clear proof one way or the other from them.

– DonielF
2 days ago





@rosends Not sure. The previous Mishnah gives different ways of acquiring animals; potentially they’re all forms of Meshichah and indicate that animals are no different than movable property, potentially they’re their own category, and potentially they’re considered immovable property and those are forms of Chazakah, not Meshichah. Gemara spends most of the time dealing with elephants, which certainly can’t be picked up, but I don’t see a clear proof one way or the other from them.

– DonielF
2 days ago













@DonielF The case with the elephant is considering it a movable object, seeing as right at the end it suggests a form of hagba’a (which can only be used on movable objects).

– Lo ani
2 days ago





@DonielF The case with the elephant is considering it a movable object, seeing as right at the end it suggests a form of hagba’a (which can only be used on movable objects).

– Lo ani
2 days ago













Interesting yerushalmi sometimes quoted on this mishna

– Dr. Shmuel
2 days ago





Interesting yerushalmi sometimes quoted on this mishna

– Dr. Shmuel
2 days ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5














We learn the halacha about a car by first looking at the halacha by a boat.

A boat is a movable property and is acquired by:




  • meshicha "pulling" from a property to another


  • mesira "transmission of an object" in the public domain and by schirut makom (leading its place) in the domain of the seller.

In Bava Basra (75b - 77a) there is a long discussion:



Rambam Hilchos Mechirah (3:3):




הספינה--הואיל ואי אפשר להגביהה, ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול, ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים--לא הצריכוה משיכה, אלא נקנית במסירה; וכן כל כיוצא בזה. ואם אמר לו המוכר לך משוך וקנה--אינו קונה הספינה, עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאה מכל המקום שהייתה בו: שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה.




Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat (198:7):




הספינה הואיל וא"א להגביה ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים לא הצריכוה משיכה אלא נקנית במסירה וכן כל כיוצא בזה ואם אמר לו לך משוך וקנה אינו קונה הספינה עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאנה מכל המקום שהיתה בו שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה:



It's impossible to rise a boat. To drag it is very difficult because dragging it needs numerous persons. Chachamim required only mesira. The rule is the same for great objects. But if the seller want to buy by dragging only, the buyer needs to pull the boat on a length of an entire boat.




Thus



By extension a car can also acquired by these ways.






share|improve this answer

























  • I will explain Gemara

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • A car might not fall into יש במשיכתה טורח גדול because it's easy to drive. (A boat might also be easy to sail but sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.9b.7)

    – Heshy
    2 days ago











  • On the dock with a cord, you pull the boat along the dock #Heshy

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • Pulling a big boat is harder than driving a car. I don't think it's obvious that the טורח is comparable.

    – Heshy
    2 days ago












  • Maybe you are right. So you think that mesira isn't an appropriate kula bli neder tomorrow I will review the sugia

    – kouty
    2 days ago


















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5














We learn the halacha about a car by first looking at the halacha by a boat.

A boat is a movable property and is acquired by:




  • meshicha "pulling" from a property to another


  • mesira "transmission of an object" in the public domain and by schirut makom (leading its place) in the domain of the seller.

In Bava Basra (75b - 77a) there is a long discussion:



Rambam Hilchos Mechirah (3:3):




הספינה--הואיל ואי אפשר להגביהה, ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול, ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים--לא הצריכוה משיכה, אלא נקנית במסירה; וכן כל כיוצא בזה. ואם אמר לו המוכר לך משוך וקנה--אינו קונה הספינה, עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאה מכל המקום שהייתה בו: שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה.




Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat (198:7):




הספינה הואיל וא"א להגביה ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים לא הצריכוה משיכה אלא נקנית במסירה וכן כל כיוצא בזה ואם אמר לו לך משוך וקנה אינו קונה הספינה עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאנה מכל המקום שהיתה בו שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה:



It's impossible to rise a boat. To drag it is very difficult because dragging it needs numerous persons. Chachamim required only mesira. The rule is the same for great objects. But if the seller want to buy by dragging only, the buyer needs to pull the boat on a length of an entire boat.




Thus



By extension a car can also acquired by these ways.






share|improve this answer

























  • I will explain Gemara

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • A car might not fall into יש במשיכתה טורח גדול because it's easy to drive. (A boat might also be easy to sail but sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.9b.7)

    – Heshy
    2 days ago











  • On the dock with a cord, you pull the boat along the dock #Heshy

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • Pulling a big boat is harder than driving a car. I don't think it's obvious that the טורח is comparable.

    – Heshy
    2 days ago












  • Maybe you are right. So you think that mesira isn't an appropriate kula bli neder tomorrow I will review the sugia

    – kouty
    2 days ago















5














We learn the halacha about a car by first looking at the halacha by a boat.

A boat is a movable property and is acquired by:




  • meshicha "pulling" from a property to another


  • mesira "transmission of an object" in the public domain and by schirut makom (leading its place) in the domain of the seller.

In Bava Basra (75b - 77a) there is a long discussion:



Rambam Hilchos Mechirah (3:3):




הספינה--הואיל ואי אפשר להגביהה, ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול, ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים--לא הצריכוה משיכה, אלא נקנית במסירה; וכן כל כיוצא בזה. ואם אמר לו המוכר לך משוך וקנה--אינו קונה הספינה, עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאה מכל המקום שהייתה בו: שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה.




Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat (198:7):




הספינה הואיל וא"א להגביה ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים לא הצריכוה משיכה אלא נקנית במסירה וכן כל כיוצא בזה ואם אמר לו לך משוך וקנה אינו קונה הספינה עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאנה מכל המקום שהיתה בו שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה:



It's impossible to rise a boat. To drag it is very difficult because dragging it needs numerous persons. Chachamim required only mesira. The rule is the same for great objects. But if the seller want to buy by dragging only, the buyer needs to pull the boat on a length of an entire boat.




Thus



By extension a car can also acquired by these ways.






share|improve this answer

























  • I will explain Gemara

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • A car might not fall into יש במשיכתה טורח גדול because it's easy to drive. (A boat might also be easy to sail but sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.9b.7)

    – Heshy
    2 days ago











  • On the dock with a cord, you pull the boat along the dock #Heshy

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • Pulling a big boat is harder than driving a car. I don't think it's obvious that the טורח is comparable.

    – Heshy
    2 days ago












  • Maybe you are right. So you think that mesira isn't an appropriate kula bli neder tomorrow I will review the sugia

    – kouty
    2 days ago













5












5








5







We learn the halacha about a car by first looking at the halacha by a boat.

A boat is a movable property and is acquired by:




  • meshicha "pulling" from a property to another


  • mesira "transmission of an object" in the public domain and by schirut makom (leading its place) in the domain of the seller.

In Bava Basra (75b - 77a) there is a long discussion:



Rambam Hilchos Mechirah (3:3):




הספינה--הואיל ואי אפשר להגביהה, ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול, ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים--לא הצריכוה משיכה, אלא נקנית במסירה; וכן כל כיוצא בזה. ואם אמר לו המוכר לך משוך וקנה--אינו קונה הספינה, עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאה מכל המקום שהייתה בו: שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה.




Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat (198:7):




הספינה הואיל וא"א להגביה ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים לא הצריכוה משיכה אלא נקנית במסירה וכן כל כיוצא בזה ואם אמר לו לך משוך וקנה אינו קונה הספינה עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאנה מכל המקום שהיתה בו שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה:



It's impossible to rise a boat. To drag it is very difficult because dragging it needs numerous persons. Chachamim required only mesira. The rule is the same for great objects. But if the seller want to buy by dragging only, the buyer needs to pull the boat on a length of an entire boat.




Thus



By extension a car can also acquired by these ways.






share|improve this answer















We learn the halacha about a car by first looking at the halacha by a boat.

A boat is a movable property and is acquired by:




  • meshicha "pulling" from a property to another


  • mesira "transmission of an object" in the public domain and by schirut makom (leading its place) in the domain of the seller.

In Bava Basra (75b - 77a) there is a long discussion:



Rambam Hilchos Mechirah (3:3):




הספינה--הואיל ואי אפשר להגביהה, ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול, ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים--לא הצריכוה משיכה, אלא נקנית במסירה; וכן כל כיוצא בזה. ואם אמר לו המוכר לך משוך וקנה--אינו קונה הספינה, עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאה מכל המקום שהייתה בו: שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה.




Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat (198:7):




הספינה הואיל וא"א להגביה ויש במשיכתה טורח גדול ואינה נמשכת אלא לרבים לא הצריכוה משיכה אלא נקנית במסירה וכן כל כיוצא בזה ואם אמר לו לך משוך וקנה אינו קונה הספינה עד שימשכנה כולה ויוציאנה מכל המקום שהיתה בו שהרי הקפיד המוכר שלא יקנה זה אלא במשיכה:



It's impossible to rise a boat. To drag it is very difficult because dragging it needs numerous persons. Chachamim required only mesira. The rule is the same for great objects. But if the seller want to buy by dragging only, the buyer needs to pull the boat on a length of an entire boat.




Thus



By extension a car can also acquired by these ways.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago

























answered 2 days ago









koutykouty

15.7k32047




15.7k32047












  • I will explain Gemara

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • A car might not fall into יש במשיכתה טורח גדול because it's easy to drive. (A boat might also be easy to sail but sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.9b.7)

    – Heshy
    2 days ago











  • On the dock with a cord, you pull the boat along the dock #Heshy

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • Pulling a big boat is harder than driving a car. I don't think it's obvious that the טורח is comparable.

    – Heshy
    2 days ago












  • Maybe you are right. So you think that mesira isn't an appropriate kula bli neder tomorrow I will review the sugia

    – kouty
    2 days ago

















  • I will explain Gemara

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • A car might not fall into יש במשיכתה טורח גדול because it's easy to drive. (A boat might also be easy to sail but sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.9b.7)

    – Heshy
    2 days ago











  • On the dock with a cord, you pull the boat along the dock #Heshy

    – kouty
    2 days ago











  • Pulling a big boat is harder than driving a car. I don't think it's obvious that the טורח is comparable.

    – Heshy
    2 days ago












  • Maybe you are right. So you think that mesira isn't an appropriate kula bli neder tomorrow I will review the sugia

    – kouty
    2 days ago
















I will explain Gemara

– kouty
2 days ago





I will explain Gemara

– kouty
2 days ago













A car might not fall into יש במשיכתה טורח גדול because it's easy to drive. (A boat might also be easy to sail but sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.9b.7)

– Heshy
2 days ago





A car might not fall into יש במשיכתה טורח גדול because it's easy to drive. (A boat might also be easy to sail but sefaria.org/Bava_Metzia.9b.7)

– Heshy
2 days ago













On the dock with a cord, you pull the boat along the dock #Heshy

– kouty
2 days ago





On the dock with a cord, you pull the boat along the dock #Heshy

– kouty
2 days ago













Pulling a big boat is harder than driving a car. I don't think it's obvious that the טורח is comparable.

– Heshy
2 days ago






Pulling a big boat is harder than driving a car. I don't think it's obvious that the טורח is comparable.

– Heshy
2 days ago














Maybe you are right. So you think that mesira isn't an appropriate kula bli neder tomorrow I will review the sugia

– kouty
2 days ago





Maybe you are right. So you think that mesira isn't an appropriate kula bli neder tomorrow I will review the sugia

– kouty
2 days ago



-choshen-mishpat-civil-law, halacha, maseches-kiddushin

Popular posts from this blog

Identify plant with long narrow paired leaves and reddish stems Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?What is this plant with long sharp leaves? Is it a weed?What is this 3ft high, stalky plant, with mid sized narrow leaves?What is this young shrub with opposite ovate, crenate leaves and reddish stems?What is this plant with large broad serrated leaves?Identify this upright branching weed with long leaves and reddish stemsPlease help me identify this bulbous plant with long, broad leaves and white flowersWhat is this small annual with narrow gray/green leaves and rust colored daisy-type flowers?What is this chilli plant?Does anyone know what type of chilli plant this is?Help identify this plant

Frič See also Navigation menuinternal link

fontconfig warning: “/etc/fonts/fonts.conf”, line 100: unknown “element blank” The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In“tar: unrecognized option --warning” during 'apt-get install'How to fix Fontconfig errorHow do I figure out which font file is chosen for a system generic font alias?Why are some apt-get-installed fonts being ignored by fc-list, xfontsel, etc?Reload settings in /etc/fonts/conf.dTaking 30 seconds longer to boot after upgrade from jessie to stretchHow to match multiple font names with a single <match> element?Adding a custom font to fontconfigRemoving fonts from fontconfig <match> resultsBroken fonts after upgrading Firefox ESR to latest Firefox