Commentary for Shabbat 260:1

שלא ברצון ר"א

[this being] against the will of R. Eliezer. R. Joseph demurred: [You say] 'against the will of R. Eliezer'! on the contrary, it is R. Eliezer' who permits it even through the street;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is a general principle (infra 133a) that where a positive command and a negative command are in question, both should be fulfilled wherever possible; hence it might be argued that R. Eliezer too agrees that it should not be carried through the street, since there is an alternative (Tosaf.). Yet it may be that since R. Eliezer's ruling is largely in order to emphasize the great esteem in which the precept is held (supra a), the Talmud felt that he would require it to be carried through the streets. ');">¹</span> but only with the consent of the Rabbis, who forbid [it to be carried] through the street yet permit it through roofs, courtyards, and enclosures,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Karpifoth; v. supra 7a. ');">²</span>

Explore commentary for Shabbat 260:1. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.