Shabbos 96 – שבת צו

The Gemara says a Melacha of significance which occurred in the Mishkan is considered an Av.  Why then is Hachnassa (which occurred in the Mishkan) not included?


One thought on “Shabbos 96 – שבת צו

  1. Tosafos says that the second Terutz was needed for Hotza’a. Perhaps the “אי נמי” is not an alternative answer, only another answer that has its own application.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *