Shevuot 17a (יז.) — the Talmud in English

is

,

The Tosafot rejected the version of the Gemara, “Is the airspace of the Temple courtyard considered like the courtyard, or not?” This is because it is obvious that the airspace of the courtyard is considered like the courtyard, since several passages make clear that if “partial entry is considered entry,” a ritually impure person may not put his hand into the courtyard ;

; moreover, “if the airspace were not considered like the courtyard, then when one carries blood and limbs to the altar, they would become disqualified as having gone outside.” However, from the words of Rambam [Deficiencies 11:4], it appears that he follows the version rejected by Tosafot, for it is explained there that if one suspends himself in the airspace of the courtyard, it is uncertain whether the airspace of the courtyard is considered like the courtyard. In Or Sameaḥ, he explained that the Gemara’s doubt is as follows: perhaps suspending oneself in the airspace of the courtyard is like taking the longer route, because he added and rendered impure a new place that was not necessary for his exit. By raising himself upward, too, he added impurity in a new place, namely, the airspace above. What difference is there between moving to the side and moving upward ; ; and the Gemara’s doubt is whether the airspace is holy in its own right, or whether everything found in the airspace of the courtyard is considered to be lying on the floor of the courtyard ; ; see there, where he inferred this from the wording of Rabbenu Ḥananel, and see what Kehillot Yaakov [new edition, 12b] wrote concerning this inference ; ; according to Or Sameaḥ, then, in our version—where the doubt is whether waiting in the airspace is considered waiting, and we do not obligate him on account of taking the longer route—it would be proven that the airspace of the courtyard is holy only because it is considered as though one were resting there]. In Kehillot Yaakov there, he wrote that one cannot challenge Rambam from what Tosafot proved—that the airspace of the courtyard is considered like the courtyard with regard to an object going outside—for perhaps the wording of Rabbenu Ḥananel here indicates that the Gemara’s doubt exists even if the airspace of the courtyard is holy like the courtyard itself. Nevertheless, the Torah obligates one for entering the Sanctuary only when the impure person actually touches the courtyard ; ; but the difficulty raised from the laws of entering the Sanctuary itself still remains. See there for his resolution. [It should be noted: according to what he cited in the name of Rabbenu Ḥananel, if the Gemara’s doubt also concerns someone who entered wearing shoes or slippers, since he did not touch the ground And we infer:

And we conclude:

Additional explanation: A. We read in Nazir 17a: “Rava raised a question: If he took a nazirite vow while he was in a cemetery, what is the ruling? Does he require a period of waiting in order to receive lashes or not? What are the circumstances? If we say…” Rather, it is a case in which he entered in a chest, box, or cabinet, and another person came and removed the ceiling above him. When the tradition teaches a period of waiting, it teaches it in the Temple, but not outside; or perhaps there is no difference. According to the simple reading, the Gemara’s doubt concerns someone who took a nazirite vow in a cemetery, and this also appears from Rambam and Raavad, Nazir 6:9 ;

;

;