Shabbos 99 – שבת צט

Rebbi Yochanan’s second question (regarding Hanacha) seems to be based on the fact that in the first case (by Akira) there is no chiyuv.  Why are these two things related?

One thought on “Shabbos 99 – שבת צט

  1. First we ask about when it wasn’t technically taken from a Reshus
    Hayachid. If we say that indeed, it is not an Akira from a Reshus
    Hayachid, is that because when you began taking it, it wasn’t taking
    from what was a Reshus Hayachid, or is it because we need that from
    beginning to end it was a Reshus Hayachid?

    We would never put it the other way. It is counter-intuitive to say
    that taking from a depth of 9 would be Chayev and placing into a depth
    of 10 would be Patur. The first thing to look at is where he is
    operating. If by Akira he would be Chayav, that would be because the
    Mechitza and Akira are simultaneous. Actually placing into a Reshus
    Hayachid would then be obvious.

    However, Tosafos on Daf 8, at the end of the second entry of Rechava
    Shisha, explains that the reason it was more obvious to Rebbe Yochanan
    to exempt the Akira than it was by Hanacha, is because an Akira has to
    be more Chashuv, and not an Hanacha. We find many loop-holes when it
    comes to Hanacha.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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