Why according to R' Akiva is it preferable to cover sheretz with a copper pot? Would this not be the av melacha of trapping?
Yakov, New York
No, this would not be trapping, as the Sheretz has to be dead to be Metamei, and there is no prohibition regarding trapping a dead animal.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose
Why is covering the Sheretz not a problem of creating an Ohel on Shabbos & Yom Tov?
Meir Zirkind
This is true for many reasons. First of all, if one covers a Sheretz with a pan that is less than a Tefach tall, there is no Ohel anyway. Secondly, the Torah prohibition of Ohel is to make a permanent Ohel, and this at most would be a temporary Ohel regarding which we probably would say "Ain Shevus b'Mikdash" (Rabbinic law does not apply regarding prohibitions in the Mikdash). There are other possible reasons to be lenient as well.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose
So the Fisachter (in Tamid Perek 5, Mishna 5) that was used to cover the Sherets was less than a Tefach? Also, if Ain Shvus Bamikdash why couldn't they remove the Sherets altogether, it's only Muktsa which is Derabanan?
It is possible that there were smaller size Fisachtars in the Mikdash, although I did not say that this had to be the case.
Some Shevusim they were more stringent not to do on Shabbos even in the Mikdash when it was possible to avoid doing so, even though we see they were not stringent regarding other Shevusim.
Another reason why this would be permitted is that many Rishonim hold that unless one needs to use the space underneath the Ohel, there is no prohibition of Ohel at all (see Taz 315:4 in name of Ran, this is also the opinion of the Rashba). This is especially true when the space underneath is not even accessible.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose