Yesterday we learned to violate the law of carrying on Shabbat a person needs to do both Akira and Hanachah (lifting up and putting down the object). The examples in the first Mishnah describes a person’s hand doing the Akira and the Hanachah. The Gemara asks the question can a person’s whole body execute Akira in the private domain and Hanacha in the public domain?
“Rav raised a dilemma before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: One whom another person loaded with food and drink on his back in the private domain on Shabbat, and he carried them out while they were still on his back, what is the halakha with regard to the prohibition of carrying out on Shabbat? Clearly, one who lifts an object with his hand in the private domain, and carries it out into the public domain is liable, as he performed the complete act of carrying out. However, in the case of one who is laden with an object; is moving his body from its place in the private domain considered like lifting the object itself from its place? In that case, he would be liable. Or, perhaps it is not considered like lifting the object from its place, and therefore he would not be liable. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: He is liable, and it is not similar to the halakha of one who had an object placed in his hand and carried it out to the public domain, with regard to which we learned in the mishna that he is not liable by Torah law. What is the reason for the distinction between these two apparently similar cases? His body is at rest, in a defined place. However, his hand is not at rest. Since a hand is not generally fixed in one place, moving it and even transferring it to a different domain without a bona fide act of lifting is not considered lifting. However, the body is generally fixed in one place. Moving it from its place is considered lifting in terms of Shabbat, and he is liable for doing so.
“Rabbi Ḥiyya said to Rav, his sister’s son: Son of great men, didn’t I tell you that when Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is involved in this tractate do not ask him questions in another tractate, as perhaps it will not be on his mind and he will be unable to answer? The dilemma that Rav asked was not related to the subject matter of the tractate which they were studying. As, had it not been for the fact that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is a great man, you would have shamed him, as he would have been forced to give you an answer that is not an appropriate answer.
“Now, he was involved in another tractate. Nevertheless, he answered you well, as it was taught in a baraita: One who was laden with food and drink while it was still day, before Shabbat began, and, consequently, did not perform the act of lifting on Shabbat, and he carried them out into the public domain after dark on Shabbat is liable. Since, as a rule, his body is fixed in one place, moving it is considered like lifting an object, and he is liable. It is not similar to lifting his hand and moving it from place to place. Since his hand is not fixed in one place, moving it is not considered lifting.” (Sefaria.org translation)
Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi answers the question that the person is liable for taking something that was loaded on his person in the private domain out to the public domain on Shabbat. Nevertheless Rabbi Hiyya chastises Rav for asking an unrelated question to the topic that Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi studying. He was worried about the embarrassment of Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi. Perhaps he would give a wrong answer or say I don’t know.
Don’t worry about me since I’m not in the same league as Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi, the final editor of the Mishnah. Please feel free to ask me any question you have and not worry about embarrassing me as Mark Twain once said, “I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did. I said I didn’t know.”
No comments:
Post a Comment