Shabbos 2a: Hotza’ah and Hachnasah, Melachah Geruah, and the Definition of Carrying

Transcript

So it's a toitzah, but l'maaseh it's geruah. It's not a big toitzah. Nothing really happened. Tell me something. It's not Torah Shabbos. It's not the emes. Pashtus, pashtus. But not with the melachah; it's not the changing. There's no problem with that. The problem is what I'm working on. It's, I carry. Ramban is saying a major chiddush here. The melachah Shabbos over here is not what I did; it's what I'm doing. So who cares that nothing created? I'm not allowed to work hard on Shabbos. I'm not allowed to overwork myself on Shabbos. Ramban says, look at this. I'm not allowed to overwork myself. So how come in my house I'm allowed to carry heavy, and outside I'm allowed to carry light? You're right. You're right. That's a nice kasha. I wish you guys would write it over for me. I'm telling you, I don't have time to write it over. Someone should write it over. Let's say you have two houses, and you have... Let's go one step further, and so to speak, take the mechaber's Torah and take the Torah that everybody says. My sevara is my first. Beautiful. He explains the truth ... beautiful. It's the second ... The second, right when he comes to the teretz, he says there's two ways to understand ... Beautiful. Let's frame it. It's not his. ... Beautiful, yeah? Listen good. What's the next step? The next step is to take all this: A, magdir; B, and to have a raya for it, and I have a raya from the Rambam. I think it's openly clear in the Rambam. If you learn, yeah, if you learn—now listen carefully, listen good—if you learn that the halacha is you're not allowed to carry, so A and B. B is the issur, or A and B is the condition. So if you learn that you're not allowed to carry, so A and B is the condition. It's mamash just condition, right? And that's why the Ramban says, Why am I ... allowed to carry? Because who cares about inside? It's not—it's you. And ... that's the chiddush. The tenai is it has to be lachutz. Now the klal is, the issur is ... What is ...? Makom zeh lo makom zeh. That's the etzem melacha, that's the ikar melacha, or it's a tenai in the melacha. Let me show you the Rambam. You're going to have to write this down because you don't know how beautiful this is. If you knew the emes, the Torah's emes I'm teaching you now, you don't know how beautiful. Let me show you how the Rambam in perek yud-bet, halacha tes, brings down this halacha. Go ahead, read it. Huh? ... chayav. ... patur. It has to have the right shiur. What's the shiur? How much more can the Rambam say? Shiur. It's a shiur. It's not the melachah; it's a shiur in the melachah. You could get it more. I mean, the Rambam says—Rambam's talking to you. You have the shiurim. You know what the shiurim is? Rishut hayachid, rishut harabim, and gragros. Those are the two shiurim in halachah. Read it again. You know, he thinks I'm teaching you Torahs and— You couldn't get a more open Rambam. The Rambam is talking. Read. Tell him to read it again. Read it again. Do you hear a problem with what I'm saying here? You're gonna chazer this? You want brisk? You want brisk? This is it. Shiur. Hamo'il. You need a shiur. What is it? ... Shiur. Unbelievable. I tell you, the Rambam—if you knew who the Rambam was, you would stop with all your ... I'm telling you, he was a gaon. You see what the Rambam was doing? The Rambam is trying to understand what is this shiur. You know what's bothering him? Ta'isis. What is Rishut harabim, Rishut hayachid? These are shiurim. It's shiurim in Hilchos hotzaah. The issur is not to go from place A to place B. It's not to go miRishut hayachid to Rishut harabim. This is what ... Rishut ... So what's ... harabim? Those are shiurim already. Which shiurim? Shiur hamo'il. And that's the answer to Rishut hayachid, Rishut hayachid. Why from Rishut hayachid to Rishut hayachid?

It's not me'il. It's not me'il; you'd have anything from it. It's like a chatzi shiur, and that's the next sugya. Is there a chatzi shiur by ...? We'll talk about it right in two minutes, and we'll talk about it in two minutes. We'll talk about it in two minutes. So give me five minutes. Half the ... you couldn't get here. Five minutes. Give me five more minutes, okay? ... Now, this I hold is a difference between Tosafos and the Ritva. Tosafos and the Ritva. Tosafos learns, Tosafos learns that the whole halacha, you hear, of the reshuyot, you hear, was halacha of not A to B, right? But tena'im. It's a tenai in hilchos. Yeah. No, the Ramban zicher learns it's a tenai. Why? Because he learns it's masra, so ... Now, in the halacha of akirah hanacha, what is that? Now it's the cheftz from A to B. What's A and B? A and B is ikar hahalacha, or A and B is a tenai? Tosafos learns it's a tenai. Comes along Tosafos and he says, mai ... In hilchos tena'im, it's a melacha gruah. Why? Because since this is not the etzem ... You know what? Let's first learn the Ritva, and I'll tell you why. You'll soon see why I want to say it better. Give me one more second. The Ritva was learning like this: ma li hachnasah, ma li hotzaah, right? What's the difference if I take it in or I take it out? What's bothering the Ritva? What's bothering the Ritva is like this: you can't ask me a kasha, what do you mean I took it through reshus hayachid? The melacha is not to take it from one reshus hayachid to another reshus hayachid. It's to take it from reshus hayachid to reshus harabim, through a melacha. And since it's grufah u'melachah, you can't ask me a kasha, so then how come? What do you mean how come? Because that's the melacha. The melacha is not to take it from reshus hayachid to reshus hayachid. It's to take it from what? From reshus hayachid. It has to go, ein bi, I'm not in what type of hotza'ah I did. It's a din that this cheftz can go from reshus hayachid into reshus harabim. How do I see from what? Because I'm trying to explain to you, the way the Ritva looks at Tosafos, if he learned that it's grufah u'melachah, then Tosafos doesn't make sense at all. What is Tosafos asking? How come, if I took it from one reshus hayachid to another reshus? Because that's not what's asur. It's asur to take from reshus hayachid to reshus harabim. What's your kasha? What's your kasha? Again, if you learn that this is the melacha, so what does that mean? I'm not allowed to take ritvah from my house to the street. That's what it is, right? So then why are you asking me kasha from my house to the other guy's house? It's not me, it's not the carrying. The problem, the problem is the book that was here on Friday night cannot be over there tomorrow. So don't ask me from reshus... So the same room, it's not a kasha בכלל, you hear? In the same room, what are you asking me, reshus hayachid? What are you asking me? Right? That's why the Ritva comes along and says, I can't learn Tosafos. I can't be matir if you're kasher toys. Why? Because since the melacha is to go from one house to the street, or from the street to my house, yachid to rabim, rabim to yachid, so what kind of kasha is yachid to yachid? That's not the issur. The issur is yachid to rabim, not rabim, not yachid to yachid. Therefore I can't say it's a melacha gruah because of that. I can't say kasha on the melacha for that. I mean, the melacha is to go from rabim to yachid, yachid to rabim. Yachid is not from yachid to yachid. It's not. What do you mean? Because that's not what it is. No, because that's the issur. The issur is to take it from a yachid to a rabim. Here, something that—chaz is asur, why not camel? Because chaz is asur, not camel. What's your kasha? Where's your kasha here? No. No. Wait, wait a second, wait a second. But maybe you can't come and ask a kasha. Toisfos was learning it's a melacha gruah, right? Now understand this nekudah, because since Toisfos was learning it's tznaiim, since Toisfos learns only a tnai, right, so it comes out we don't care that it went from here to there. It's even less than that. What is it? I'm not a moitzi, and the whole here to there are also tnai. That's why it turns into a melacha gruah, because even in the melacha, even in what happened—what happened? The book was here and now it's there.

That's also not part of the melacha. That's also not asur. It's only conditioned to be oiver. That's why the melacha is grua, because the etzem of the melacha itself is nothing. The melacha is this. Oh, that's very good. If the melacha was that it went from his pocket to the street, so I don't want to. ... It went from one place to another place. Yesterday it was here, now it's here. Tosafos is saying, I learned that it's all tenaiim anyway. Mimeila I have a kasha: why the tenaiim like this? Why can't the tenaiim be like that? Shir hamoel — hu sheshir hamoel. Maybe shir hamoel means to bring it to his house. But once it's the melacha, you cannot ask the melacha. Yeah, this is the melacha, and I'll take a ritual from a house to a street. That's the melacha, right? But how come not? Here, you have to blow shofar on Rosh Hashanah with an ayil. Why can't I blow with a bugle? Somebody asks a kasha. It's melacha grua, yeah? It's a mitzvah grua because I don't understand. You don't understand? Go learn. Go find — go learn tinyan mitzvahs. What kind of kasha is that? Here what you're saying, you're saying that the sefer who is now being in your house today, tomorrow is now being in the street. Do you have a kasha on that? That's your kasha? But if you only learned its shiurim to explain what I did, it's a shiur in how much I did, so mali mali. It's a very good kasha. What, this is any more or less, more mo'il? You know what? To take something to the street is less mo'il to me than to take it to this other house. I'd rather do that. Who tells me what's mo'il and not mo'il? That's Tosafos's kasha. Mimeila Tosafos, that's why he calls it melacha grua. Now you see why Tosafos calls it melacha grua, because the tenaiim are only tenaiim. No, so the melacha is nothing even. It's not even to take it from here to there. It's not even that also. You should take it from here. Where I take it, what I take it, what did you do? You didn't do anything. That's the Tosfos. Mashenkein, there is from learned that from here to there is a chelek of the... On this he asks a kasha: mai li hachnasa, mai li hotzaa? The guf hamelacha is what? From one reshus to another reshus. That's the guf hamelacha. So he asks, mai li, mai li? What's the difference which way it goes? It went from the street to the... same thing? The same. If the guf hamelacha is that this sefer went from place A to place B, it always goes from place A to place B, either way. That's also A and B, because who says what A is? This is moredik. What's the nafka mina with all this? Yes. Yes, the last part like this: in Tosfos, are you with me? I beg you, I'm telling you, any— you want to tell me any guy who learned Shabbos, go to him and tell him this, he'll say, Wow, you learned— you obviously already taught you good the Tosfos. This is how to learn the Tosfos. There's no other way. There's nothing. And I'm not— I'm not marich, we're gonna go further. That's it. After this we go further. I'm not making you crazy. I'm telling you what you gotta know. This Rambam— if you don't know this Rambam, you missed an open Rambam. You missed the Rambam. I mean, Rambam is clear. Rambam says the shiur amot. Don't believe it. Tosfos is saying— what time is it? I don't know, it's flying. Once it's only tnaiim, so the fact that this sefer went from here to there is also not what the melacha is. That's also not what the melacha is. That just makes that you should be chayav for this type of melacha. I should be chayav for this melacha if I'm doing melacha. This melacha is just the— that's the melacha. It's the shiur in the shiur, right? Right. Because a bigger car, a smaller car, reshus hayachid, reshus harabim, it's a shiur. Comes out. Huh? How can you have what? Shein what? He says, the Rambam says it. Because there's no melachah here. If, bishlema, you have the melachah taken from here to there, gotta get something. I took a ritzpah from here to there. But that's not even the problem. The problem is not to do anything. The problem is just a... so what are you doing? Okay, the ritzpah, that the reshus hayachid to rabim is the melachah. And if we can ask like Tosfos, so what about another reshus hayachid? That's not the melachah. But his kasha is A and B, they can never be from place A to place B. Because for you that's A and this is B. Ma li, ma li, right? A ma li of reshus hayachid to reshus harabim, but you can ask ma li hotza'ah, ma li hachnasah.

What's the same thing? Why it's melacha grua? Different shitos, why it's melacha grua. It has different lomdus what the issur is. I know, halacha, but why it's called a melacha grua? What do you mean? You don't know what the melacha is. I mean, you're learning what the melacha is. Okay, now. Okay, what do I have in this? What do I have in this? What do I have? Huh? We're not holding yet. What do I have? What do I have in this? The Chasam Sofer and the Pnei Yehoshua have an interesting chiddush over here. I want you to do it tonight. From Rashi's mashma, right, that it's only asur mid'rabbanan. If you do half, it's only asur mid'rabbanan, right? From Rashi's mashma, you only are half, right? If you take a look, Chasam Sofer brings a shita, and the ... also says the same thing, and he proves it even from the lashon of the Rambam. Chatzi shiur asur min haTorah. If you did half of the melacha, you'd be over al chatzi shiur asur min haTorah. You won't be chatas, but you'll have a... So I don't have time now. We'll do it more tomorrow. Look at this Chasam Sofer. He proves it from the Rambam, from the Rambam over here. He proves it, because he says that the Rambam puts together the hotza'ah, hachnasah, to like what? Chatzi... I understand, but the question... I didn't say the word ... chayav chatos. He compares to chatzi shiur, because he says the Chasam Sofer, he makes a major diyuk: akar v'lo hiniach bichlal. There was never the last, the second part. It's a real chatzi. It's not chatzi of a whole; it's chatzi chatzi. That's Chasam Sofer's diyuk. What would be the halacha? This Chasam Sofer, this Tosafos, this... If it is good from a melacha, then you can commentate chatzi shiur. But if it's a melachah, you can't say chatzi. You begin to do the melachah. But if it's a shiur, you can say chatzi shiur. That's without Eruv Shabbos, because you have the whole thing; you just don't have it l'gabi. Okay, now yechaper. I have to do the rest tomorrow. This, Hashem, this is what you have to know. Before I start, I just want to point you out to Daniel. Daniel, when you chazer this shiur more and more, hope you appreciate it more and more. Don't you see? All the sefarim. Daniel has all the sefarim. Tell me, you'll find this in this sefer? Point to this. But the point is, you have to learn the blatt. I'm saying, the point of all of this is to learn the truth. I'll teach you how to learn the truth. This is what it is. You got to know this. Anybody who says, I learned Mesechta Shabbos and doesn't know this information, then learns, will not learn Mesechta Shabbos. The question number one I want you to know is the diyuk that we made in Rashi. Yeshai Shabbos, right? Rishus l'rishus. What does Rashi want? Why is Rashi saying? First diyuk, we said there's no inside, there's no outside. It's rishus l'rishus, and shnei motza'os kari lei, right? I want to point out—okay, the truth, I'm not holding it yet. I don't feel so well that I'm— I can't, I can't. I know I have to drink it because it's going to give me koach, but I'm not holding it yet. If I learn, I get my mind off, and I don't feel well, I'll stop drinking. Yeah. Now. Okay. Now, and that's ... right? Okay. So then I wanted you to know the Ran. The Ran learns, why do I need ani and baal habayit? Because they're different. One is a motzi, one is a machnis, which is not like this Rashi. Okay? Yeah, yeah. For each one, there could be a motzi and a machnis. Right, but Rashi holds there's no such thing. Rashi holds everything is a tefis. No, but how does Rashi hold it? The mishnah says... Never said one word of... Yeah, that's where they're standing. It doesn't mean motzi and machnis.

Why don't you see this talk about? He's just saying the word yetziam yirshus l'rshus goes both ways. So the Rambam למעשה learns that the Mishnah—this is what I want you, this information—the Rashi seems to learn that the baal habayis and the ani technically are doing the same thing. Just one is outside, one is inside, but they're doing the same melachah, the same act. The Rambam learns the Mishnah is zu mitzu; one is a machnis and one is a motzi. Okay, that'll be question number one. Question number two. But you'll have to explain that. You have to explain, because it's not inside-outside. You have to explain it's rishus l'rshus. That's clear. The answer is, why do we need—I showed yesterday, you learned yesterday—why do I need baal habayis and ani? He says they're not the same thing. One is a machnis, one is a motzi. You're right, but one's a machnis, one's a motzi. One is inside, one is outside the house. So the Ran is not learning like that. That's what I'm showing you from the Ran. The Ran is learning there's the guy standing outside, and the Ran is holding there's the baal habayis standing inside, because that's the metzius, what's happening. The metzius that's happening is to be machnis, but one is the motzi and one is the machnis always. He says it's not like that. You're missing the point. The fact that the guy's inside, so always he's the machnis. I'm talking about on the Torah, on the shaylah in the Torah. Right? What is the meaning of the Baal HaBayis? That he's machnis, or he takes from outside and brings in, or he takes from inside and puts it out. So he's machnis, or... In other words, when the Baal HaBayis takes it and gives it to the ani, that's motzi. That's motzi. He also has the other case with machnis. Yeah, that happens to be another case of ani. But that's a case of ani. That's what he's trying to say. You're right, because of the factuality of it, because of the technicality of it. The Ran is trying to say that there are two different hilchos Shabbos. There's a hilchos Shabbos of machnis, the Baal HaBayis taking out, and there's a special melacha of the ani taking in. The what? Why do you have two? No. He brings two pesukim, one for the ani, one for the Baal HaBayis. It doesn't... Yes, because of melacha gruah, not because בעצם it's different. The top Rashi. Which top Rashi? Yes, the second Rashi, ד״ה שניהם. No? The chiyuv malkus. I mean, ad kedei kach, the Rosh brings from the Chiyuv miParis, that if somebody is machnis and motzi, he's chayav shtayim. That's this Ran, not this Rashi. You hear how far it goes? So this is what I want you to know. On the first question, I want you to know Rashi, the Ran, and the Rosh from רבי חיוני פרי. Good? Where is this Rosh? Rosh davka. He brings it down, parshah. The same person was motzi, and then he was machnis, he's chayav shtayim, because two different melachos. Why shouldn't it? Because it's one melachah b'helem echad. He did two melachos b'helem echad. I understand, but you get chiddush. Okay, good. That's question number one. Rashi, huh? ... right? So even out is not the same thing. Who holds in the...? Who? You're saying that you're chayav two. Even out is not the same thing. Meaning it's a raya to the Rambam. It's a raya to the Rambam. That's the Rambam l'chud. Okay. The next thing I want you to ask is question number two. Ready? Pshat, pshat. No Shabbos. Come on. ... Clor, clor, clor, clor. I'm just teaching clor. I know. Okay, now, the next question, question number two is going to be, when it says shehein arba, what would we medayek from the lashon of the Mishnah, shehein arba, and what would we medayek the same thing from the Rashi, mi'divrei ...? Just like the first two or the second two? Not a gzeirah, so to speak, I would have said.

It became heitzer as heitzer in Rabbanan. It means they were mosif tumah heitzayos. Understand? That's why they did it. But what was done was hisifu. Now l'maaseh, it's not a gezeirah; it's called heitzer mi'derabbanan. They're motivated by this, but they created— The whole reason is because of— You're right, but l'maaseh, this is heitzer mi'derabbanan. It's not stam like, like, like you have a chiyuv in all derabbanans shema. It's heitzer mi'derabbanan, and we'll soon see the significance of this. You got it? Yeah? Otherwise, in no other melachah do we find the lashon, chayrish she'ein chamishah, ... chamishah mi'derabbanan. And what will we medayek from Rashi? And also, what do we do with the last part of Rashi? Yeah. The Rabbanan came along and said because of a gezeirah, we're therefore going to make now heitzer mi'derabbanan. But everything else, the thing itself is just a gezeirah. But it's asifah. If you do that, the Rabbanan said, don't do this. Not asifah. It's not asifah. ... In other words, when we see clear the chasim melachos and how it works, we'll understand the asifah, okay? Question number three. Question number three. But that is telling us everything right now. I know, fortunately. This is my words. In the next Rashi, from the words that Rashi says, ... Only the ... from this lashon Rashi. Again, again. Here, Rashi says, ... על ידי שניהם. No. What do we ... from this lashon Rashi? Yeah, I understand. I understand. See, it's two ... that the melacha is complete. It's not half-half; it's two halves of a whole. Remember, pri Megadim, remember? You need two, right? So this is what you have to know. Hey, you're gonna have to know the pri Megadim. Then it's not pshat each one did a half. Together, they did a whole. ... Rashi wants. I know that it's possible. Everybody knows it's possible ... two people. The chiddush only here is that the only time you're chayav on this derabbanan of half is the half of the whole. One guy did an akirah, one guy did ... and then ... you did a hanachah. It has to be the one did an akirah and the same, at the same moment, the other guy did the hanachah. Not like the Rambam, which is not like the Rambam, but the Rambam says it doesn't bring the case of ... The Rambam says it's stam: each one guy's meniach and one guy's ... that's derabbanan. Right. So the Pri Megadim learns the only time yesh midrabbanan is in such a case, right? So the Rambam is machmir even if it's not such a case. So we spoke out the svara. But the reason why the Rambam holds like this, because it's taka half of the hole would be asar chatzi shiur. Remember? Therefore, when is it derabbanan when it's just a half. Huh? The Pri Megadim is mashma the only time this derabbanan exists when it's half of the two parts. I mean, each guy did, and each guy did half, right? But one guy did a half, and that's it, or another guy did a half, and that's it. There's no derabbanan. He clearly says these things. The din of shnayim, the din of two, is a din that each guy did half. Huh? Yeah, that's what the ... said. No, the pshat. The Pri Megadim is going with derabbanan. When is it derabbanan? When the whole melachah is there and each guy did half. The Rambam is the whole, because then in such a case it would be chatzi shiur from the Torah. What's pshat? We spoke about it, because it's not a shiur. Like toldach melachah is the melachah. Remember we said, if it's a shiur, so we said because the Rambam's l'shitaso, right? Here, yeah. Rambam learns this is ... does not ... The Rambam learns that it's a shiur, right? Because of chatzi shiur. Well, if it's only half-half.

There's no hole. The tafs, and it's a dabar, because if it's really a hole and each guy only did half of the hole, then it would be chatzi shiur min haTorah. That's how the ... learns in the Rambam. The reason why the Rambam didn't give the case in the Mishnah literally, because in the case of the Mishnah, you can make a mistake and think, oh, you need the whole melachah, and when you have the whole melachah, that's when the dabar is that each guy did half. The Rambam learns no, because then it's min haTorah, right? And we said that we will ללמוד the Rambam's shitah. The Rambam learns that tzorech hachnasah is like a shiur. Are you with me so far, so good, or not? Good, depressed, what's wrong? We asked the question: Tosafos, eruvin. That's going to be your next question. How does it work out with Tosafos, Eruvin daf chaf? Isn't the hand not a makom patur? Not a hand. Okay? So we went to separate reshuyos, and even if... So we said like this. We spoke like this. The Beis Meir asks this first kushya, and he answers that it's talking about a case like a skufa. And just like a skufa, you're allowed to do it shemoshot b'Shabbos, so too over here. What we have from this, that the problem of you might come to finish the melachah that the Rabbanan aser is not now; it's in general, it was only Shabbos. And with this, we'll be aser the last part of Rashi, because from one hand the Gemara says you might come to finish, so you don't have that by hanachah. But hanacha you don't come to finish. So he said, doesn't mean now; means generally you might come to melachah. The problem is the last part, Rashi. So we will be meyashev also, so there's the last part of Rashi also, not kashya. Why? By hanachah there's nothing to finish. It's finished. So you did half. How could you come to do the rest of the melachah? It's finished, right? Yes, very nice, no? The Beis Meir seems to learn that our sugya is the Gemara of haskupa, and that Rashi says משום שבות. We medayek from this that the shema yavo lidei melachah is not now, but shema yavo lidei melachah is what? Later on. And with this we meyashev, because the Gemara says you might come to finish the melachah, but you did hanachah. How can hanachah be chayav? The teretz is, not now; and generally you might come to melachah. The problem is, why do the last part Rashi? Yeah. The shaylah is why do the last part Rashi? Because Rashi says that it only says akirah is she'ein techilas hamelachah, v'ikar l'meimar shema yimareda. So what's the problem of the Mishnah? Not that you might do another melachah, but shema yimareda. This one. Maybe, maybe. But how could it be yimareda? It cannot be a gemar. But hanachah, but the akirah says that the Mishnah akirahs that will probably be gemar. What do we see? The only thing that the yoreh for is where it's probably be gemar, not general. Now, so how can Rashi—? But what's the gemar here, I want to know. Complete the melachah. He finishes the hanachah. What do you mean? Akirah, then he finishes with hanachah. There was akirah. Akirah. So Rashi says you only want to say the akirahs that can probably degmar. Okay. Yeah, what's the difference? According to this it should be no difference. Okay, you with me? Special thing to an akirah which can come to hanachah. Everything is asur. It's very chashuv. It's me'ir. I don't know what to say. I don't think he brings a Beis Meir. I'll tell you, any guy who learns Shabbos. When I learned Masechta Shabbos, you see, the Beis Meir was the main, the main, just Beis Meir was one of the main things. Who speaks about Beis Meir? It's on... Shulchan Aruch. We have a Beis Meir here, I think. You want to bring? We have a Beis Meir. Maybe. Chayin, it's like the Imrei Binah and Choshen Mishpat. There's a sefer called Imrei Binah. Yeah, Imrei Binah. We used Imrei Binah in Choshen Mishpat. We used also in... Explain, give it a binah. Explain the... Imrei Binah.

Now, that was question number one. Okay, what do you do with it? Rebina, um, Beis Meir, and the answer to that is, says, yeah, says the Beis Meir, but it all depends if you learn like the Smag or not, meaning there's a question if the gemara's askufa is by one person or by two people. If it's by one person, then doesn't apply here. Smag with a gimel, Rishonim, sefer mitzvos. Could be the case of askufa is only by one person; it's not by two people. If it's by one person, then you can't apply askufa over here. So the Shem Yisalzuli b'Shabbos is only by one person. Okay. So, if it's by two people, you're not choshesh. Askufa patur. From a makom patur, it becomes mutar. So then this case doesn't apply. That's right. He said it's only good according to the Smag. The Beis Meir says, according to Smag that learns that that's only by two people, so we can say askufa is not. But if it's not by two people, then— No, no, no. Okay, now we're going to explain, im yirtzeh Hashem, what's the difference in a makom patur between one person—what was the machlokes? I want to explain between the Smag and the shitas hacholekin, which, by the way, is the Chazon Ish. Chazon Ish, siman ... topic. Maybe it's only by one person. That's fine. I want to explain, im yirtzeh Hashem, the machlokes: why is askufa only by one person, or even by two? We're going to get to it, okay? No, because this was just hakdamah to the final shiur. Okay, next, next thing. Next thing. We had a question. We had a question. How is it that the Gemara says if a guy did a melacha Erev Shabbos, he atir Erev Shabbos, and he did the hanacha on Shabbos, the Gemara is chayiv, and Rashi says, Rabbanan, it's asur. The question was, the akirah was done. According to the Pri Megadim, you need akirah and hanacha. Why should he be chayiv at all? This is according to the Rambam, he can have half. According to the Pri Megadim, you can't have half. What does that Gemara say? Says Rav Neiser, ma'aseh had akirah. Who cares? It wasn't on Shabbos. Who cares? Ma'aseh have the akirah and the hanacha. We have here, but it wasn't on Shabbos. Yeah. With the Pri Megadim, but the chachamim can even do it on the weekdays. How does that work? No, once you do hanacha, that's already the end of the melacha, meaning he is ... You have to explain. That's very difficult. It wasn't on Shabbos. So we want to answer all this. I hear what you're saying. That's how it's the way it was ... The hanacha ends off the akirah that was done already. It's Hashem, we're going to explain all these kashas we just asked in light of something else. I asked you in Tosafos, next question: What is the translation of the word melacha gruah? We said either gruah means the melacha is weak, or like you spoke out from the Rambam, questionable. Questionable, not weak but questionable. I said there's a rule one has to learn, it's weak, and therefore what does he bring? In itself, nothing changed. So I asked you a kasha. Teida, I established. Marie Katz. I knew I saw the Rishonim somewhere. It says Marie Katz brings it down. Marie Katz asks a kasha: Where's the teida? Teida, there's nothing changed. The answer is, you trapped animals. You go to the zoo, you don't go to see wild animals; you go to see trapped animals. But a pocketbook—literally, you changed. I'll tell you one. You're chayav for catching for three seconds and taking it out. An animal is more wild when—yeah, but right away, soon as you catch it, it's a wild animal. You should be chayav when you—whatever. Right, right. Why do we care right now? I'll tell you the difference. It's possible it's going to become changed then. Going to be bothers—I don't like it. After years of being in the zoo. Okay, come. Yeah? Marie Katz asks for a kasha. The way you say, then it's a kasha. You say it's a kasha. Okay, now. I saw it. I told you I saw it somewhere. I don't know where I saw it. Now, look, next.

Okay. He said in Tosfos, that Tosfos must l'choira mean that it's a question, because all he does is ask you questions. Ma li if you take it from reshus hayachid to reshus harabim, ma li if you take it from reshus hayachid to reshus hayachid? That's only a question. It doesn't rule the melachah. It's a question, okay? Question. So the question is, so l'choira Tosfos must be learning grurah must be what? That it's lacking, we can't understand. Grurah. The three sheets. You have to know, that's the next question. You're writing down all the questions? Writing the answers? Okay. Three sheets: Ritva, Ramban. Now, next question. How does R' Moshe and Olam HaTorah in general learn the machlokes Tosfos and the Ramban? And the answer is, masa, or hotza'ah mi'makom l'makom. The actual act of carrying. Tosfos learns it's what? Makom l'makom. So therefore he asks the question from reshus hayachid to reshus harabim. The Ramban is learning it's what? It's masa. What does masa mean? The actual act—it's not the taking out, it's the carrying. No, it's the carrying. So therefore he asks the question: why inside if you carry a pasuk? You have to hold—it's the shiur of carrying. Okay, good? That's why the Ramban asks about carrying, and that's why the ... asks about going mireshus l'reshus. How can we learn the halachah grurah for this reason? He learns the halachah grurah. That's weak. That's not ... We took it one step further. We said like this: How do we explain this? So we have to explain this. First, the Ramban learns it's דין המגביה. That's first. The man, the man is not doing the work. The meileh he can't learn like the Aruch HaShulchan, because it's not a question of chayes. It's not a question of chayes; it's a question of you doing the work. Second of all, we have to understand... Yeah, who cares the shinui? It's not... it's you. It's not chayes. You're supposed to rest. You're supposed to rest. ...even though you don't change anything. Comes along, so that's the first nekudah that we said. And the second nekudah that we said is, according to the Ramban, what's the point of in and out of the house and all that? It must be tzniyus; it's just conditions. Yeah, obviously, because the whole thing is the carrier is you. Then we go to Tosafos. We went on and we said, what's the machlokes Tosafos and the Ritva? Tosafos vadai learns דין in the cheftza. The question now is, this thing that I'll take from one reshus to another, is that the melacha, or is that a shiur in the melacha? Ramban learns it's tzniyus. Tosafos, the question is, it's a condition to be over for carrying heavy loads, shtei makom l'makom. Tosafos, the question is maybe he learns either it's shiurim, or it's gufa melacha. What's gufa melachah? So therefore we say like this: Tosafos must learn that it's a shiur. What is a shiur? A reshus for one reshus to another is a shiur. That's why Tosafos questions Malachah. Right. Once the shiur, the shiur don't make sense. That, and also the shiur don't make sense, right? That's why Tosafos says, mali reshus hayachid, right? I say, I can't ask why. That's the melachah. Melachah is to go from the inside of the house to the outside, or from the outside to the inside. So okay, asking by reshus hayachid, that's not the melachah. You say to learn shiur. Melachah is the carrying. The shiur is from one house to another. So the question is, why is this better? Well, and if the reshus hayachid is two blocks away, and the reshus harabim is five inches away, for this I'm chayav, for that I'm patur. Why am I patur? I carried further to reshus hayachid. It's shiur. It's the shiur of shiur. First we're learning not like Ramban. Because Ramban is learning it's the maaseh, it's the act of carrying. Tosafos is learning it's the cheftza. About carrying, the cheftza is being carried. The question is, how much did you carry the cheftza?

So the shiur is from rishus to rishus. What's the difference? Why that rishus hayachid? Huh? It's a tenai in the shiur, right. That's why the Ritva says, I can't ask me kashas; that's the melachah. So therefore he says, well, it's not a tenai; it's a shiur. It's a shiur of how much I have to carry. How much did I carry? One of the tenaim of the melachah is the shiur. According to ... it's no shiur; it's a condition. This is a condition. The Ritva is the exact opposite. The melachah is to take it from place A to place B. Take it from place A to place B. Therefore he asks it differently. How does he ask it? Right? How could the melachah itself doesn't make sense, because ... If the melachah itself is to take from this rishus to that rishus, so what's the difference ...? Therefore it's a melachah grua. In other words, Tosafos didn't ask the Ritva, and the Ritva doesn't ask Tosafos. And the reason why the Ritva doesn't ask Tosafos is because—what do you mean? Because the melachah is not to take it through rishus hayachid; the melachah is to take rishus harabim. The melachah is to change reshuyos. You can't be mechashev rishus hayachid. I'm not to change. That's the Ritva. You can also ask what? I don't see why this is an amud ... Same thing. They're both doing the exact same thing. That's the kashah. Let's go. Okay. What I think, this Ritva b'emes is the Rambam that we started off with. That's the Rambam rashi that we started with. The Rambam learns, and the Ritva learns. The rishus is exactly the same, one called yachid, one called... The chiddush is that even though it shouldn't make sense, but it makes sense. It is conceptually different from one. Right, and that's what the Ritva learns. That's why the Ritva is saying, I can't ask. Right, but that's why I don't ask. In other words, the Ritva is the Rambam, that there is a machlokes and there is a ma'aseh. Only question is, why is one of them one... That's why is one of them one. That's the rule. But how do you make a... to the house or to yourself? No. Obviously it's a ma'aseh to the reshus harabim. Right. Even though both of them made the ma'aseh, meaning the balabayis outside, took it outside. That's why balabayis is called the... Why? Balabayis is called the ma'aseh and he called the ma'aseh. But you can't really contrast that to another reshus yachid, because the melachah is machmas the ma'aseh. It's to these special reshuyos. Once you learn the reshuyos are bedavka, then you can ask me a kasha, there's a chiluk between a machmas and a ma'aseh. The reshuyos are not bedavka. It's just two different reshuyos. So then Tosafos is right, why not reshus yachid? The Ritva, so this you have to know, the Ritva, write it down. Of course, this is called a rat, and Tosafos is that Rashi. This is Rashi. When the Baal HaMeor made the sefer, right, he took it from the house to the street. It was what? From the פירושי היכא to the פירוש הרמבם. It's from Rishus hayachid to Rishus harabim. I mean, they did the same thing from Rishus hayachid to Rishus harabim, right? That's kasha. It is the same thing, right? That's the kasha. He did both of them from a... It's not called a yotzei; that's nothing more. That's... called... So why? So why? The Rambi brings it in. He wants to say you wouldn't be able to learn the... from one point to the next, bringing this. The fact that he did hotzaah, he did hachnasah, is the... because one was a ma'aseh and one... Rishus hayachid, Rishus harabim are the same. It's two different things. There's one thing taken from Rishus hayachid to Rishus harabim. Around says he's monkeying to the... No, no. It's not like this. It's not so much the Rishus; it's to what he did. On the... when he brings it inside, he's a... When he came with the... out, he's a... and they can't be put together. Okay, fine. Pshat, because it's not shiurim in hilchos melachah; it's a... that's the melachah, Rishus harabim. Tosafos holds the same thing also. That's according to Tosafos. Tosafos holds it's shiurim. You understand about the... he holds you need the... for the... because... Tosafos holds it's shiurim. It says the shiurim. Are you with me? Klar? Yes. Yeah? You have it klar? Yes. Klar. Yes. Klar. It is clearly, clearly, clearly the... Just for your information, we started the same...

Could be the same principle, but that's not the point. Yeah, mitzvah, perfect. Okay, let's go. Not. The ritva is who? The ritva is? The Ran, right? The Ritva learns that the melachah is to take this from reshus hayachid to reshus harabim. That is the melachah, and the melachah is the reversal, to take from reshus hayachid to reshus harabim. One second, one second. So therefore it's two separate melachos. The kasha is, why do they have different— That's the kasha. Why do they have to come on? Come. Yeah, you have it? Yes. Thank you, Tosfos. Tosfos learns like Rashi's nekudah, that mali mali, what's the difference? If everything is from one reshus to another reshus, even reshus hayachid, it's the same thing. Right. What's the difference? Cool? How's Ritva going like Rashi? There's a difference. He said it's the same thing. No, it's two separate— there's two separate melachos. The only thing is the chiyuvim, they should have the same chiyuv. Oh, that was the question, right? That's the Ritva. They should have the same value, that's all. In logic, they're two separate melachos, two separate things. He doesn't see why one and not one. That's all. You want to know why aren't they both others? Yeah. Why are they both others if they both did physically the same thing? Okay, now, you ready? You understood the Ritva, why it's the Ran? You understood why Tosfos is Rashi. Okay? Yeah? This is the Rambam, simply because the Ritzvah's learning the melachah is from one reshus, sayachid to reshus. That is the melachah, not different reshuyos. Therefore, the machlokes is one type of melachah, because he put it in reshus hayachid, and the motzi is a different type of melachah. It should be the same level of importance. So he takes into consideration the same level. The same melachah. I think Rashi doesn't care about the reshuyos; it's just a different one, right? Therefore, he says that even reshus hayachid should be the same thing. Rashi doesn't care about the different names. Rashi just learns the main thing is that it should go from one to another; it should change. So what's wrong with it changing to a reshus hayachid? No. The shiur. Rashi learns that all yetzi'os from one reshus to another is called a yetzi'ah. That's the concept, even reshus hayachid to... You change reshuyos. You went from one house to another, one domain to another. Who cares? Who cares that it has the same name? It has the same name. However, reshus hayachid through reshus harabim to another reshus hayachid. Yeah, the names don't mean anything. It's just for us to know it's... If the shiur, how much did I go? I went from one place to another. Who cares about the place? It could both be reshus hayachid, both be reshus harabim. Yeah, you have it? Clear? Okay. With this, I understand ... Now I'll tell you what I understand. We have two psukim: Vayotzishim kaimoi, Vaykali am mehavi. Which pasuk goes for what? Which pasuk goes for what? So the Ramban learns that Vaykali am mehavi is going on the baal habayis, right? And Vayotzishim kaimoi is going on the ... So the ... is the opposite, right? Vaykali am mehavi, the Ramban learns, is going on the baal habayis. Yeah, and next one, right? And Vayotzishim kaimoi is going on the ... Mashenkein, the opposite, the ... Now because this learns that they're both going on the baal habayis. Okay? Nothing. So that's what we learn out from the baal habayis. So I want to say, what's the heter of this machlokes? ... learns that they're both going on the baal habayis.

One is like ... about a bayis, and one is hachnasas of the baal habayis. Yeah? Yeah. Okay. Another she'eilah we have with the Maharsha. Maharsha learns that you need two pesukim. ... Maharsha learns you need two pesukim. Does anybody ask why you need two pesukim? Maharsha says that Tosafos asks two pesukim. Why? My third kasha I asked you: when do you know moshiach? Could be you have to carry it. You have to pick it up and bring it to the next domain. How do you know moshiach? Maybe you have to bring it. I mean, that's the case that was in the Beis HaMikdash. The case in the Beis HaMikdash is that you brought it. ... The person walks out. The person walks out with cheifetz. So he walked out, right? No. I understand, but Moshe is also chayav. The question is, how do you know Moshe is chayav? That's the question. Maybe Moshe shouldn't be chayav. Tosafos learns that it's built in the pasuk. No, that's right. The kasha is maybe, maybe the hand is nothing, or it's Moshe, so why didn't he move? Tosafos learns mehavi is mashma the cheifetz, not the person. So Tosafos learns. Therefore you can't say a kasha, how do you know Moshe. I'll tell you what I think the pshat is. We'll see what we learn pshat in all this is. Okay, pashut. If you learn ma'aseh is chayav, and you don't need a pasuk. If you learn ma'aseh is chayav and you don't need a pasuk, you know what the pshat is? Because the person is not the—it's not the gavra, the problem; it's the cheftza. That means it was never—who cares who you are? The problem is you can't bring the cheftza from one place to another. It don't do you. It's not your doing of it; it's the cheftza al yedei you. Yeah, where your pasuk from? Ma'aseh, that is hotsa'ah. Which Tosafos talks about. And the first Tosafos, mini? No, the ma'aseh—yeah, I'm saying the main one, that's why I understand why ma'aseh was never a she'eilah, because since the whole melachah is not the person, but rather the cheftza, who cares? What's the pshat in the two pesukim? I think the pshat in the two pesukim is very pashut; you'll see how everything fits in. Let's say I only have one pasuk, right? So what would be the limud? The limud would be, and I'm now take out from one reshus to another. And I wouldn't have a special pasuk for reshus hayachid to reshus harabim; it would just be one reshus to another. You know what? I would have only had one pasuk, but I would think that the reshuyos is the guf ha-melachah. The reshuyos are the guf ha-melachah. Why? Because I'll take from one reshus to another, and that's what's asur. Now that I have another pasuk, so another pasuk is telling me that so to the ani is not allowed to bring it back, even that's nichlal in the first pasuk. Now it's שני רשויות. And the answer is, which is the question, and the answer is—oh, so what's the answer? No, not—how can we split the melachos? What do you mean? No, so what's the two issurim? One is inside-outside, and one is outside-inside. Yeah, but if the issur is taking the melachah from one reshus to another, who cares? And the answer is— These are dinim of shiurim. If it's a guf hamelacha, so what's the difference which way it goes? If you learn to tnai, you would see the Torah even says a tnai. What's a tnai? That's the Tosafos kasha. Tosafos says once I have two pesukim for the guy inside and the guy outside, so I know tznaiim. I know it's not the guf hamelacha. Guf hamelacha, what's the difference, inside or outside? And the guy did the same thing. What's the difference if he carried it like this or he carried it like this? He did the same thing. And the answer is because the tnaiim are different. Once you learn reshuyos are tnaiim, right, Tosafos, ... melacha gruah, it's only a condition. It's not the melacha itself. In order for this, you have to have the conditions. So Tosafos says I don't see the condition with that, and therefore I call it melacha.

And that's why he needs the two pesukim. And that's what the machlokes is about, the pesukim. The Rosh learns—let's start with the Ramban. The Ramban learns that what's the ikar of the melacha? The ikar of the melacha is the maaseh, right? The ikar of the melacha is the maaseh, is the carrying. So what are these halachos of back and forth? Are tolaim, right? So according to him, what's the ikar melacha? Tell me, who? You, the carrying, right? You, the carrying, because the maaseh, right? And then there's tolaim v'shiurim. Comes out, so the pasuk of Vayakhel al hahav, which is what? Which is that the cheifetz came to the Beis HaMikdash, says the Ramban has to be going on who? On the baal habayis. The Ramban learns that the pasuk of Vayakhel is going on the baal habayis. Right. Let me say what I mean. Let's start with the pasuk, Yotzi min komei. What does Yotzi min komei mean? Min komei, right? Okay. So the nekudah is min komei. In the din of the baal habayis, min komei is not the ikar. Min komei is not the ikar. The karsha says, right, min komei is not the ikar. Mehavi becomes the ikar. That's why he learns the baal habayis is the mehavi. The Avi has to have a different pasuk. Mimkomo reshuyos. No, the ikur melacha is— No. Al yotzi ish, al yotzi ish, al yotzi ish mimkomo. Then the pasuk is, there's a mimkomo. Who? The word al yotzi ish mimkomo, the pasuk. So mimkomo tells me reshuyos, right? Obviously the problem is the place where it is. According to Ramban, that's not part of the melacha. We don't care about the place. It's conditions to be over. That's not the point. Whatever makom you like it that way, so right into your Torah that way. I don't care. It's not ענג to me. Good, right? Yes, yes, okay, now. Good, good. So why do we care about places? According to Ramban, place is not the issue. That's just a condition. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Masha'en kein by ... mehavi, I don't say where and what; it's the ma'aseh bringing. So he learns the mehavi has to be for the who? For the baal habayis. And then there's another halacha of al yotzi ish mimkomo, which goes for the ani. Slowly, and I'll show you why I'm saying that. Let me answer you, because al yotzi ish mimkomo tells me clearly that the problem is where and what the cheftz is going from. Your place somewhere else. Al yotzi ish mimkomo, according to Ramban, that's not the melacha. You're right, it is baal habayis. Big why not? Because that's not the ikur melacha. Because that's not the ikur melacha. The melacha is not mimkomo; mimkomo is not to do with hilchos Yetziah. You sometimes understand why this and why. So watch it. That's the next step. The one says you have to throw one more piece of rabban, and then you have to throw the rabban in shoes, and then you'll see how everything fits in. Okay. The rabban learns, Vayikolim hahavi is the baal habayis, al yoytzi kelim is the ani. Tosfos learns the opposite. Al yoytzi mikomei is the ani, and Vayikolim hahavi is the... Right, right, right. Okay. The rabban learns that the ikar melacha is not from one place to another. The ikar melacha is to carry. Where is the pasuk of baal habayis, which you ask me why it's baal habayis? I can see why he's here. But whatever it is, baal habayis, it's not al yoytzi mikomei. What is it? Vayikolim hahavi. Carry. It's the bringing. The stress is not the mikomei. The stress is the bringing. It's the melacha.

By carrying. Ah, mehavi. Now, according to the Baal, the main melachah is mehavi, not carrying. The carrying is not. We don't—because ... what's called carrying. Yeah. Comes along, comes along Tosafos, says, no, I believe it's the opposite. Why? Listen carefully. Listen good. Yesterday I asked you, ikar hakrah. Now again, this you have to know already a little bit. The Rambam brings one pasuk, he brings another pasuk. It's a whole shailah what pasuk is the real pasuk, okay? Now, are you with me or not? Huh? He's an ... kaddish. He's a big ... guy. Is ikar pasuk by ani? Is by ashir—I'm sorry—is by baal bayis and ani learned out from it? Or is the ikar pasuk by ani and the baal bayis...? The Rambam learns—remember the Rambam? What does the Rambam say? The Rambam says ikar pasuk is—remember the Rambam? No? Remember? Is ikar to give or is ikar to—who gives who? What's the ikar? The machlokes is. Why? Yeah, the machlokes is. The ikar ... carrying, and balavash... Why? Because the baal bayis takes himself. Right. Ani's not going to give the baal habayis; the ani takes himself. Baal bayis. Remember such a thing? I said it. Okay, so let's see inside Ramban. Bring me the Ramban. Nu? We're almost finished. We're almost done. On the ... I have ... lav yotzei ... Okay. ... chayav. ... Okay, it says Baal habayis. ... shederech ha'adam limshoch l'atzmo, ... have a halacha chashuvah. V'zeh taam ... kiyum takanah. You know what the Ramban says? That the emes, all we really need is one pasuk, taka. So what is that one pasuk for? He tells the Baal habayis. ... You hear? Right? It says Baal habayis, shederech ... limshoch l'atzmo. ... Take to you. Give me the one pasuk. ... ... shederech ha'adam limshoch l'atzmo. ... He himself. He always says that he's giving it to bring it to yourself. ... Baal habayis and ... is what the pasuk you need for. That's what you don't need for. ... In this case, that's what he means. The ... We're talking about the same thing, everyone. Two ... ... he calls it to yourself. Yes, to the ... The halacha to me is hotza'ah of the ani takes himself, and then the ani takes the hoytza'ah. Why? Because that's each of the melachos, shekein haderech that a person takes himself. Right, but you don't need pasuk for it. You look at the Rishonim, yeah? You look at the Rishonim. For example, the Ran, the Rashba, they learn the exact opposite in the Ramban, that if I only have one pasuk, you know which way it would go? It would go the opposite: nachnas l'baal habayis to the reshus hayachid. It would work that the— not the hotza'ah, the nachnas. Oh, they look at the ani just... don't ani shmain. They take it out and bring. If you had only one pasuk, says the Ramban, the main thing would be for the baal habayis and the ani taking it out. And the other Rishonim say the opposite. If it was only one pasuk, you know what I would say? It's the ani and the baal habayis bringing it in. What's the hesber of the machlokes? It's very pashut and everything. The Ramban always learned the melachah is not defined on the cheftza, no, it's the person. Right. The question is, what is melachah chashuv by the person? And the answer is, he takes it himself. That's why he learns.

The maishch l'atzmo is the melachah. ... That's what happened. The ani is... I understand what you're saying, but the mirror cases. Whatever you say by one, you say exact same thing by the other. The baal habayis is giving the ani; he's not taking from the ani. The normal case is the baal habayis is giving the food to the ani, right? The other case of the Mishnah was an ani giving to the baal habayis. That's not normal. What is that? And that's what the Tosefos explains. That's where the tzaad is not to you, but that you took the cheftz inside. Normally a cheftz is not supposed to be outside. You take it inside, you did something. Instead of being in the street, now it's inside. You did something. So what's the ikar, hachnasah or hotzaah, if you look at the cheftz? Hachnasah. That's the machlokes Rishonim. The Rosh said... For the ani, he could have hachnasah, yeah. No, fooling himself, because the gavra. What's wrong? The gavra, the person, puts himself in. For the ani, and the baal habayis puts to himself. The baal habayis doesn't put to himself. There's no such thing. The case could have been that the baal habayis is only to put it in the house. He doesn't need it. The baal habayis needs it. The ani's piece of bread. You need to... You have to know all the Mishnayos to say this. That's the Tosefos. That's not my mistake. I thought you don't need the story. That's why those cases were just to say ani, baal habayis, instead of saying reshus hayachid, reshus harabim all the time. If I only had one pasuk, there's machlokes Rishonim. Okay, so this is the question. You ready? Question on the test. If I only had one pasuk, which one would I know? The Ramban learns, you know which one I would know? According to the Ran, I wouldn't know — there couldn't be such a thing. You know why? Because machlokes and motzi are two different things completely. I need both. According to the Ran, I need both. According to the Ramban, at the end of the sugya, you read this on your own, the Ramban says I need both. And the reason why I need both pesukim is, machlokes is not motzi and motzi is not machlokes. The Ramban, at the end of the day, writes that technically we can get away with one pasuk too. And the reason why we can get away with one pasuk is because the main melachah of hotzaah is not the case where the baal habayis took it back from the ani or the ani brought it inside the house, but the opposite: that the baal habayis gave it to the ani or the ani took it to himself. Right, the one pasuk. We only had one pasuk. It's not — it's hotzaah. He took it from the inside and he took it to the outside. To what? To the baal habayis himself. He took it to himself. He's saying for ani — he said the baal habayis gave it to the ani or the ani took it to himself. It's not — yeah, but we don't — that's not — I don't need anything. The hotzaah, no, to take it out. You took it outside. But aren't we talking about the case where the ani took it from the baal habayis? Right, and he took it outside, right? Right, so that's outside, right? That's outside. Okay, it's outside. That's what hotzaah. Cool, hotzaah, right? Rashi explains this game, l'maaseh, l'maaseh. The fact is, that says the Ramban that's ikar hotzaah, because the derech of the melachah is chashuv is to bring it to you. So I'm showing you an unbelievable Ramban here. And at the same time I showed you that the Rashba and the Ritva and all the other ones, what do they do? The exact opposite of the Ramban. But if I only had one pasuk, I would say the opposite: the ani bringing it in or the baal habayis bringing it in himself. So the Gra learns — that's why you need two pesukim. The Gra learns, what's the pshat in these Rishonim? He says because the baal habayis being oiker from inside, or the ani being oiker from inside, is nothing. Why? Because he tries to always look there anyway. He could be out all day, all day and all night for me to play what you want, carrying your house. So kol zman there's no, kol zman there's no hanacha outside, that tirah inside was really nothing. That's how the Goyim learns the pshat in the Ramban. But he doesn't explain who says the Ramban. He doesn't explain which ... Ramban. Shrita. That's how it's explained, because what the Baal HaBayis did was nothing. Why is that so? Pashut, because he did not take out. Once he took out, so what's wrong with the hanacha? I don't know.

The case of the Mishnah, right? They took out, they brought in, they took out, they brought in. Says the Ramban that if I only had one pasuk, you know the pasuk would go for? The case of taking out from the house to the street from both ends, side on the inside and side out. Right? That understood? The Ramban learns only for ani, but he takes it from the baal habayis, or he takes it outside. What the baal habayis gives to him, or he takes it— That's the two pesukim. So if I only had one pasuk— That's when you have two pesukim. But if I only had one pasuk— Right, that's when I have two pesukim. I know. Are there two pesukim for hotzaah? Unless there would be only one. And who says that— I would understand the case is where the baal habayis— Yeah. And also, and also, took it himself. That's what I just said. One pasuk. The Rishonim say the exact opposite. Also, that if I only had one pasuk, I would only— I would learn that it's talking— Nothing. Don't confuse you. It's only good. Okay, leave it alone. Now, comes along the Gra, he explains why the Rishonim don't learn like the Ramban. And the answer is because the Ramban, the way you're making it sound is that the baal habayis is taking it out of something. The baal habayis taking it out of something. You know why? Kol zman it didn't leave the reshus of the baal habayis. Right. Because the person took it out from the ani's domain to mine. I did something. I took it from— But we're not talking about that. We're not talking about that. The baal habayis took it out to the street. The one you said, the case that you just said that the Ramban learns, is the baal habayis picked it up and took it into the street. Right. I'm just talking about the case right now. I know about that case you said. There's only one pasuk. There's only one pasuk. But there's not nothing. The Gra learns that there's no— It would be in the same case, it would be not melachah, what would happen? Akirah of baal habayis is nothing. That means if baal habayis dies, there's nobody till the money comes into the picture. That's why the Rishonim don't ללמוד that that's ikar melachah. The ikar melachah works the other way around. Akirah reshus harabim is how it starts. Ikar is when it starts, that's akirah reshus harabim, because you're already starting to do something. I want to say that the Ramban, the Ramban is be'emes l'shitaso. Okay, we're going to end right now, come. The Ramban is be'emes l'shitaso, yeah? The Ramban learns, because the masa, not the mekomos. To me, what's the ikar chashuv melachah? To bring it to you. That's called masa. That's how people carry. People carry for themselves, not to the other person. Mashenkein the other Rishonim. Other Rishonim learn that the ikar is that the cheftza went from place A to place B. So where's the ikar? That the cheftza from outside went inside or from inside? It's much better from outside to inside. The ikar chashuv melachah is if you bring things in the house, not out of the house. Ramban is the opposite, that the ikar would be from the house to the street. No. No. Right. So both cases about bais, only taking it out is the melacha. No. The baal habayis is taking it out to himself. No. The baal habayis gives it to the ani. To the ani is more closer than giving it to the baal habayis. The baal habayis doesn't need it, doesn't want it. What's he after? It's just a question of putting it in the house, that's all it is. If you look at the cheftza, the makomis, and ניק is the other way around. That's, I think, the machlokes Rishonim. It's the same kavanah, but depending on who you look at, it comes out different. Why is it too hard? It's so simple. It's not hard. It's complicated. That's very tough. But meila, everything with moshit makes sense also now. Now I chap why the Rishonim, the Tosfos HaRosh needed a limud. It goes like this: in the Tosfos HaRosh, it's by kolea al mehavi, which is which pasuk? Which is a pasuk of the bringing, right? Right. If we would learn from the pasuk, Yad ish mimkomai, to the ikar is the makomis, I wouldn't need a pasuk anymore, because moshit, who cares as long as you went from makom to makom. But since he learns it from Vayikra...

Which l'chai is really just mashma that the chayvetz is now being carried, so it has to do with the gavra. So therefore the Tosafos has a hard time understanding where Moshe comes into the picture. Amazing. I'll get here. Come. Ready? Ready to make a siman, ready to finish. Ready? Come here. We have two pesukim for Yotzi, what are they? One pasuk, Yotzi min kaimai. What's the stress of the pasuk? Min kaimai, right? Yotzi shouldn't take out from one place to another. His place is from one place to another. Okay. By koli amavi is the stress to what? Where and where? Where? Let's see one word about bringing in. Bring. Who says in, out? Who says ...? It can be the outside. What's mehavi? To bring me. Say, mehavi. Mehavi means to bring, bringing. So a guy could bring it in the same reshus also. Bring me the chair, give me the same. There's no min kaimai, there's no stress. If you went out, yotzi min kaimai, it's a baal habayis. And the Ramban learns that the ikar melachah is on the baal habayis. It's a ... baal habayis. So therefore if we learn, ikar is the maaseh. Maaseh, maaseh. You learn out from pasuk, from the first pasuk. Right. The Ramban who learns, that's the beginning of the ... The Ramban who learns that the ikar is the baal habayis, is the meiti, meaning because I learn that the ikar is the fact that I carried it, it's not the min kaimai. So maybe we learn ... also is which pasuk? The pasuk for the baal habayis. And then I have a hava amina to say, mehavi, we don't care about the reshuyos. I say according to the Rosh, and the other Rishonim, the ikar is the opposite, the reshuyos. And therefore we learn out which pasuk? ... min kaimai. I'm only concerned here, the ... is the main thing. To the havamina would be like koli on the havi, you wouldn't need where we're bringing it to, because the translation of havi doesn't mean reshuyos. So then the kasha becomes, what do you do with maisah? So therefore he has to stick it back into the pasuk. Huh? It's not what? I don't know the connection, but I... So what do we do with this pasuk? What do we do? You also understand the baal habayis. The ikar melacha is the baal habayis saying the person, and therefore we go after what the person would normally do to himself. And then you also understand the machlokes on the side of Rishonim and the Gra. Okay. Good, yeah?