Related%20passage for Eruvin 204:19

ורבי יהודה אליבא דמאן

But if this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Our MISHNAH:');">⁵⁹</span> represents the view of R'Eliezer should not tying be permitted also for the first time?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the case of charcoal (cf. Supra n. 7) .');">⁶⁰</span> - Rather say: This is no difficulty since the former<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Our MISHNAH:');">⁵⁹</span> is the view of R'Judah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who in respect of work on the Sabbath draws no distinction between a knot and a loop (Shab. 113a) and, since the preliminary requisites of a precept supersede the Sabbath, a knot is permitted as well as a loop.');">⁶¹</span> whereas the latter is that of the Rabbis.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who do not include the making of a loop among the main classes of work forbidden on the Sabbath, while a knot is included. As the string call be secured by a loop (which is a permitted act) the making of a knot (a forbidden act) was justly forbidden even in the case of the preliminary requisites of a precept.');">⁶²</span> According to whose view, however, did R'Judah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who, as has just been explained, is the author of our MISHNAH:');">⁶³</span> give his ruling?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to which the making of a knot (which is one of the main classes of work forbidden on the Sabbath) is forbidden for the first time');">⁶⁴</span>

Explore related%20passage for Eruvin 204:19. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.