Amud 31a

תוס' ד"ה שעקירה

For uprooting is a requirement for placing - שעקירה צורך הנחה היא

Summary:
If we maintain א"א לניסוך בלא הגבהה we can assume that ר' ירמיה maintains עקירה לאו צורך הנחה (even where א"א לאהדוריה).

[View / Print]

תוס' ד"ה דאי

For if he wants he can bend down and eat - דאי בעי גחין ואכיל

Summary:
According to רש"י we require that one’s hand rises more than three טפחים from the ground to be קונה. According to תוספות if the item is in one’s hand or mouth he is קונה regardless whether it is less than three טפחים. The case of גחין is where it was on a rod and he never took it with his hand, but rather placed his mouth over the rod.

[View / Print]

תוס' ד"ה הכא

Here too let us say, picking up is necessary for carrying out - הכא נמי נימא הגבהה צורך הוצאה היא

Summary:
The question on ר"א is only according to the version that עקירה צורך הנחה. The חיוב of הוצאה begins with the עקירה and continues until the הנחה.

[View / Print]

תוס' ד"ה נימא

Let us say, picking up is necessary for carrying out - נימא הגבהה צורך הוצאה היא

Summary:
According to the ר"ת who does not require ג' טפחים for קנין (while עקירה requires ג' טפחים), we need to say that the ruling of גונב כיס is (even) where he picked it up from a rod which was ג' טפחים aboveground.

[View / Print]

תוס' ד"ה שהגביהו

That he picked it up in order to hide it and he reconsidered and took it out - שהגביהו על מנת להצניעו ונמלך להוציאו

Summary:
The act of נמלך can be considered as a second עקירה.

[View / Print]

תוס' ד"ה אבל

But for adjusting, what; he is exempt, etc. - אבל לכתף מאי פטור כולי

Summary:
It was (seemingly) not necessary to distinguish between לפוש and לכתף in order to reject the case of עמד.

[View / Print]