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?
Quick Search:
Quick Search Daf Insights:
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?
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.