SHI'URIM OF HOTZA'AH FOR EARTHENWARE (cont.)
(Rav Asi - Beraisa): The smallest hole that disqualifies an [intact] Kli Shares is Kones Mashkeh - the Shi'ur of Motzi Mashkeh pertains only to shards.
Question: Why does a hole that is Motzi Mashkeh disqualify a shard?
Answer (Mar Zutra brei d'Rav Nachman): [Shards are used only to catch what drips from a Kli] - people will not use a shard if they will need another shard to catch what drips from it.
(Ula): R. Yosi b'Rebbi Avin and R. Yosi bar Zavda argued [about the Shi'ur to prevent Hechsher of seeds] - one says that it is k'Motzi Rimon, the other says that it is enough for a small root to pass through;
A way to remember the opinions - 'Whether one does a lot or a little...' (the two Shi'urim are the biggest and smallest of Rava's [three biggest] Shi'urim; surely, the Shi'urim of Motzi Mashkeh and Kones Mashkeh have no connection to seeds).
(Rav Chinena bar Kahana citing R. Eliezer): The Shi'ur for [Taharas] Klei Cheres is k'Motzi Zeisim.
(Mar Kashisha brei d'Rabah citing R. Eliezer): ...If they have such a hole they are like Kelim of manure, rocks or dirt, which do not Mekabel Tum'ah mid'Oraisa nor mid'Rabanan;
If it has a Tzamid Pasil, it is not Mekabel Tum'ah unless most of it is open.
THE TOLDOS OF HOTZA'AH
(Mishnah): If one threw from Reshus ha'Yachid to Reshus ha'Rabim or vice-versa, he is liable;
R. Akiva says, if he threw from Reshus ha'Yachid to Reshus ha'Yachid and Reshus ha'Rabim is in the middle, he is liable;
Question: What is the case?
Answer: If two ledges jut out from houses on opposite sides of Reshus ha'Rabim and he was Moshit (passed an object) or threw from one to the other, he is exempt;
If both ledges were on the same side, one is in front (further along in Reshus ha'Rabim) of the other, if he was Moshit from one to the other, he is liable, if he threw he is exempt;
This was the Avodah of the Leviyim - there were two wagons, one in front of the other, they would pass Kerashim (boards of the Mishkan) from one to the other, they would not throw them [because they were very heavy].
(Gemara) Question: Throwing is a Toladah of Hotza'ah - where does the Torah forbid Hotza'ah? (Tosfos - it is known that Hotza'ah is a subordinate Melachah, if there was not a verse for it, it would not be considered an Av.)
Answer (R. Yochanan): "...Va'Ya'aviru Kol ba'Machaneh" - Moshe was in Machaneh Levi, a Reshus ha'Rabim, and he told Yisrael not to take out [more donations for the Mishkan] from Reshus ha'Yachid (their tents) to Reshus ha'Rabim.
Question: What is the source that this was on Shabbos, and he stopped them from bringing because it is a Melachah? Perhaps it was on a weekday, he told them that no more donations were needed - "Veha'Melachah Haysah Dayam..."!
Answer: We learn from a Gezerah Shavah 'Ha'avarah-Ha'avarah' from Yom Kipur:
It says there "V'Ha'avarta Shofar Teru'ah" - just as there it refers to a day (Yom Kipur) when Melachah is forbidden, also Ha'avarah written regarding donations for the Mishkan.
Question: This shows that Hotza'ah is forbidden - what is the source for Hachnasah (from Reshus ha'Rabim to Reshus ha'Yachid)?
Answer: Logic dictates, there is no difference between taking out and talking in - however, Hotza'ah is an Av, Hachnasah is a Toladah.
Question: One is liable for both of them - why is one called an Av and the other a Toladah?
Answer #1: The difference is, if two [different] Avos or two Toldos [of different Avos] were done together [in one Helam of Zadon Shabbos and Shigegas Melachos], he is liable for each;
If he did an Av and its Toladah, he is liable only once.
Question: According to R. Eliezer, who is Mechayev two Chata'os for an Av and its Toladah, how can we answer?
Answer #2: Melachos that were in the Mishkan are important, they (some texts - important Melachos in the Mishkan) are called Avos, those that were not (some texts - important) in the Mishkan are Toldos.
Answer #3: [Regarding transferring Reshuyos,] what is written (Hotza'ah) is an Av, what is not written (e.g. Hachnasah) is a Toladah.
THE SOURCE FOR THE MELACHAH OF THROWING ON SHABBOS
(Mishnah): If one threw something four Amos [in Reshus ha'Rabim] at a wall [and it stuck to it]:
If this was above 10 Tefachim it is as if he threw in the air [and it never landed, he is exempt];
If this was below 10 Tefachim, it is as if he threw on the ground - one who throws four Amos on the ground is liable.
Question: What is the source to Mechayev one who throws four Amos on the ground?
Answer #1 (R. Yoshiyah): People who wove curtains would throw needles to each other.
Objection: Weavers do not use needles!
Correction: People who sewed curtains (Rashi - they sewed designs; Rashash - they sewed curtains together, or repaired torn curtains) would throw needles to each other.
Question: Perhaps the sewers were right next to each other (there was no need to throw)!
Answer: They would not do so, lest they prick each other with the needles [when pulling the thread tight].
Objection: Perhaps they were within four Amos of each other!
Answer #2 (Rav Chisda): People who wove curtains throw the shuttle (holding the woof) across (between the warp threads).
Question: Even after throwing it, it is Agud b'Yado (he is connected to it, he holds onto the woof)!
Answer: The last time he throws it, he lets go.
Objection: He throws it in a Makom Patur (between the warp threads)!
Answer #3: Rather, people who wove curtains throw [spare] shuttles to people [weaving a different curtain] who ask to borrow it.
Question: Perhaps they were right next to each other!
Answer: They would not do so, lest they hit each other when pulling the warp tight at the end of the curtain.
Objection #1: Perhaps they were staggered (they were not in line with each other - even though they were close, they would not hit each other)!
Objection #2: They did not borrow from each other!
"Ish Ish mi'Melachto Asher Hemah Osim" - everyone had his own Kelim, he did not use another's.
Objection #3: We still have no source to Mechayev Moshit four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim!
Answer #4: A tradition from Moshe from Sinai teaches all the Chiyuvim for four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim.
(Rav Yehudah): The [man executed for] Mekoshesh (gathering wood, Bamidbar 15:32) carried four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim;
(Beraisa): He detached wood [from trees].
(Rav Acha b'Rebbi Yakov): He made piles.
Question: What difference does it make why he was killed?
Answer: We need to know on account of Rav's teaching:
(Rav): I found a hidden scroll, in which Isi ben Yehudah says that there are 39 Melachos, a person [who does all of them] is liable only once. (Even before the Oral Torah was written, one was permitted to write Halachos to help himself remember - Rambam, introduction to Mishnah Torah.)
Objection (Mishnah): There are 39 Avos Melachos.
Question: Why do we need to know the number?
Answer (R. Yochanan): This teaches that is one did all of them in one Helam, he is liable for each. (Surely, Isi agrees with this!)
Correction: Rather, there is one for which he is not Chayav [Misah - but Isi agrees that he is Chayav Chatas for all 39 - Tosfos 6B].
Rav Yehudah is sure that one is Chayav [Misah] for carrying in Reshus ha'Rabim, the Beraisa is sure that one is Chayav for detaching, Rav Acha is sure that one is Chayav for making piles.
(Beraisa - R. Akiva): Tzelafchad was the Mekoshesh - it says "Va'Yihyu Venei Yisrael ba'Midbar va'Yimtze'u Ish...", and it says "Avinu Mes ba'Midbar" - just like the latter refers to Tzelafchad, also the former.
R. Yehudah ben Beseira: In any case, you should not say this!
If you are right, the Torah covered up his identity, and you reveal it!
If you are wrong, you malign a Tzadik!
Question: But R. Akiva learns from a Gezerah Shavah!
Answer: No, he had no tradition for such a Gezerah Shavah.