Okay. As the seder is always, we have to everyone has to turn around facing this way by the shiur. As I said in the beginning, this is not what we call the שיעור כללי, הגם there is a big chakirah what's the פשט שיעור כללי. Is it shiur klali because it's it's a כלל'דיקע ענין, or shiur klali for the כלל הזאל? If פשט שיעור כללי that it's for the whole זאל, so then this is shiur klali. If it's the other פשט שיעור כללי, then this is not a shiur klali. This is what they call the שיעור פרטי. It's because we're not going to it's not going to be like a shiur klali to explain, it's a גאנצע build-up of a inyan. What we do in the regular shiur is go through peratim, separate inyanim, and like I said this year what I want to focus a lot is also on learning inside certain things, and mimela giving, explaining or whatever. So this is what we're going to do now. So, as I said we'll learn the Maharsha and I hope everyone learned the Maharsha, so we're going to go through like this trying I don't know whatever I'll manage in this hour, go through two Maharshas and try to explain a little bit, to answer or explain the she'elot, explain it, and also try to go through the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch. Because here from the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch we get an understanding peshat in the Mishnah, which if not for this, you learned the Rishonim you would see it, but the Alter Rebbe puts it all together, so we'll go through these few halachot. So let's start first with with the Maharsha here. Not the first Maharsha, but yeah, the one of the Maharshas. Tosafot asks the she'elah, as we all know: Why does the masechta start with יציאות השבת? Why doesn't it start in the order of the day? Tosafot goes through the whole list: should have started אל יצא החייט במחטו, which is a Mishnah later on in this perek, the further Mishnah. Should have started there, that a tailor is not allowed to walk out Friday afternoon, go around with his needle in his jacket or whatever it is. That's how the tailors used to do it. And the reason is we're afraid you might come to carry, you'll forget and you'll continue, you'll carry on Shabbos. Then when is the issur, when is the when does the din apply? ערב שבת, afternoon or ערב שבת. Then there are other דינים Tosafot says, noge'a here: אין שורין דיו וסממנים ואין צולין בשר. Says that Beit Shammai holds you're not allowed to soak ink or things like that in a keli before Shabbos and allow it to go into Shabbos, you're not allowed to do that. And it says also you're not allowed to put meat on the roast, on the fire, and it should continue into Shabbos. Then it says ba- so that's when do you do that? Before Shabbos. לאחר כך במה מדליקין, how to light the candles. כירה is the perek which talks about how you're allowed to put food into the oven before Shabbos. במה טומנין, it's another case of having it covered. All the dinim of not being allowed to do it before Shabbos. These are devarim which are noge'a k'shei- also ערב שבת, but closer to Shabbos. Then what you could walk around on Shabbos, etc., etc. So Tosafot sec- the last answer of Tosafot is: Why doesn't it start with that? Because the truth is he takeh wants to start with the kash- with the Mishnah of אל יצא החייט במחטו. Really that's the intentions, he wants to start with the Mishnah of ערב שבת, you should not go out with a needle because Friday this a din on Friday. But he can't do that. He can't start that way because people will ask. You tell a guy, you know, he's starting off, \"You know you can't walk out with a needle Friday.\" Why? \"Because you might come to carry on Shabbos.\" He'll stop and ask you, \"Carry on Shabbos? What's wrong what's what's carrying on Shabbos? Who cares?\" So you got to first tell him you're not allowed to carry on Shabbos. After you tell him not allowed to carry on Shabbos, then you can tell him pratim that Friday also not. So the reason he starts with this is he it's an introduction to אל יצא החייט. Then Tosafot asks: If before you give any gezeirah, any din derabbanan, you have to first tell me the the מלאכה דאורייתא about it, so why דוקא הוצאה? Why doesn't he say melaben, that there is a melachah that you can't wash clothes on Shabbos? To wash clothes is one of the מלאכות דאורייתא, one of the avot melachot, before you come to tell me that you're not allowed to give a washer the clothes because he's going to wash it on Shabbos? So you got to first tell me מלבן. He doesn't do that. And also, why doesn't it say that you're not allowed to make a fire on Shabbos before you tell me how to put away the food before Shabbos? What's the reason you're not allowed to put away food in the oven before Shabbos unless you do certain things? Because we're afraid that on Shabbos you might make the fire bigger. So you got to first tell me you can't make a fire on Shabbos. Why doesn't he do that? Why davka here does he first say that you can't carry before he tells you you can't walk out with a מחט? So Tosafos answers because other מלאכות people know more or less. You don't have to tell them. הוצאה is something people don't really know, because הוצאה is a מלאכה גרועה, a shvache מלאכה, mimela people don't know, that you got to tell them.

So Maharsha here is going to is asks, so when Tosafos wonders why it doesn't say מלבן because of אין נותנין כלים, so why doesn't Tosafos ask also on other מלאכות that he mentioned before? Before he said that he should have mentioned אין שורין דיו, that you can't soak ink before Shabbos, in the thing. So why doesn't Tosafos ask that same שאלה? If by הוצאה you have to tell me first you can't carry before you tell me the דינים like you can't walk out with a needle, so why doesn't he say the מלאכה why you can't soak in in things in the in the כלי and the the ink? Tosafos doesn't ask that. Why not? Tosafos just asks two things: if you're going to tell me by הוצאה, why doesn't it say מלבן because of אין נותנין כלים לכובס, and why doesn't it say מבעיר משום במה טומנין? Why doesn't Tosafos also ask it should have said the מלאכה before it comes to telling you that you can't שורין כלי according to בית שמאי? You want to say something? Oh, I thought you. And Tosafos and the Maharsha says that the Ran actually take brings that, too. When the Ran asks the שאלה, the Ran take says it. The Ran asks, why is it take only by hotzaah that he has to tell me, why doesn't he tell me by the others? And he gives an example: why doesn't he tell me by אין שורין the melachah before that? So why doesn't Tosafos ask the same she'eilah? And Tosafos answers, and the Maharsha, I mean, answers that it's not the same. The other ones, the ones that Tosafos mentions, are אבות מלאכות. Why can't you put away food that in a certain way in the oven? You might come to make a fire. Fire is a melachah. Why can't you give to a washer clothes? Because what melachah will be there? There's a melachah of מלבן. מלבן you can't do. By you can't soak ink, what's the problem of soaking ink according to Beis Shammai before Shabbos and it's going to go into Shabbos? שביתת כלים, that's all it is, because Beis Shammai holds not only you can't do a melachah, your כלי also can't do a melachah. And if your כלי can't do a melachah, that's an issur, that's an issur of שביתת כלים, and they learn off of a pasuk. But that's not an אב מלאכה. שביתת כלים is an issur. So Tosafos only asks the שאלה בנגע it should have said the אב מלאכה before it tells you the details, the other details, but when it's not an אב מלאכה, it doesn't say it. That's the Maharsha's תירוץ.

The she'eilah is why does the Ran, yeah, ask the she'eilah? Lechora this is different, this is no she'eilah. Why does the Ran ask the question from even from אין שורין דיו when there's no אב מלאכה here? So we have to know, basically, what is the sevara that we could have in the machloket between Tosafos and the Ran? There's obviously a machlokes. Tosafos does not ask this question, and according to the Maharsha, the reason why Tosafos doesn't ask this question is because this is not an av melacha, this is שביתת כלים, and according to him it does, it is an av melacha, or it is a melacha of it. Okay. This is the shaila. It's not a kashya, just trying to understand it. This is you're going to notice a lot of times in the shiurim one of the things I try to do when there's a machlokes Rashi and Tosafos or other rishonim, to try to understand what is the reasoning behind. Here we find the reasoning of one of Tosafos, the Maharsha says a reasoning for Tosafos why Tosafos doesn't ask the shaila, because Tosafos holds there's no problem here because it's not an av melacha, and he says it is an av melacha. So I'll try to explain what could be the machlokes between Tosafos and the Ran. What is שביתת כלים? Your keli cannot do a melacha. So what's the pshat it's not an av melacha? There must be some melacha here. If there's no melacha here, then it's not שביתת כלים. Beis Shammai holds that keilim have to rest on Shabbos. What do you mean keilim have to rest on Shabbos? Any melacha that you cannot do, you can't have your keli that happened in the keli. So there is an av melacha, so there is some av melacha here. There is an av melacha here that this is why Beis Shammai says he can't. So if there's an av melacha, what does the Maharsha mean that the reason Tosafos doesn't ask the שאלה because it's not an אב מלאכה? Has nothing to do with an אב מלאכה? It has to do with, there's some אב מלאכה! And the לשון of the ר\"ן is takeh that why doesn't Tosafos why doesn't the Mishnah bring the אבות מלאכות from מאי שנא דהאי? There is an אב there. שביתת כלים is not an איסור, it's it's it's it's an אב, it's connected to an אב מלאכה. So what does the Maharsha mean? So now I'm turning around, I'm saying I don't understand Tosafos. Until now, I did, I said I don't understand the Ran. Tosafos has a reason why he doesn't say it, because it's only שביתת כלים, not an אב מלאכה. But what's the Ran's סברא? Now I'm turning it around, saying the opposite: the Ran does bring it, and he and he says that it's a and now I understand Tosafos, because it is a מלאכה. שביתת כלים means that כלים cannot do any מלאכה. So לכאורה you could say that this גופא is the מחלוקת between Ran and Tosafos.

We find the Rebbe has an explanation in Likutei Sichos חלק ל\"א, עמוד 122. There is another דין which is similar to שביתת כלים. שביתת כלים is a מחלוקת between בית שמאי and בית הלל, as we know. בית שמאי says you're not allowed to have the כלים work, בית הלל says you are. But there's another thing which is similar to it, which there's no מחלוקת and everyone agrees: that's שביתת בהמתו. A person's בהמה is not allowed to do any melachah on Shabbos. שביתת עבדו, an עבד, a goy, is not allowed to do any melachah on Shabbos. That's a din, and that everyone agrees. שביתת בהמתו is a din de'oraita that you're not allowed to have your בהמה do a melachah. So the Rebbe has a chakirah there בנוגע שביתת בהמתו or שביתת עבדו, and the Rebbe's chakirah is like this: Is this a din on the owner? There's a din in שמירת שבת of the owner that the owner is supposed a person is supposed to keep Shabbos, part of his keeping Shabbos that his כלי his melachah his בהמה cannot do a melachah. It's nothing to do with the בהמה, it has to do with him. Just like he can't do a melachah, he can't have his בהמה do a melachah. It's a din on the person. Or you could say the Rebbe says it's a din on the בהמה. Now, you can't be mechayev a בהמה, but there's a din that the Oibershter wants a בהמה of a Yid should rest. Who is responsible for seeing that a בהמה of the Yid should rest? The Yid. But it's not part of his שמירת שבת. The first way is it's part of his שמירת שבת. He has to keep Shabbos in many ways, so one of the things he has to do to keep Shabbos is not allow your בהמה to do a מלאכה. So it's the דין on you has nothing to do with the בהמה. It's a דין on the person that a person is not allowed to have his בהמה do. And the second way is, it's a דין on the בהמה that the the Oibershter doesn't want a בהמה of a Yid should do a מלאכה on Shabbos. But you can't be מחייב a בהמה, בהמה is not has no שכל. בהמה, you can't say you're חייב, you're חייב מלקות if you do it, what are you חייב, כרת, מיתה? So the Torah gave the person the responsibility to make sure that the בהמה doesn't do it. But it's not part of the person, it's not part of the שביתה, of the resting of the person. And the רבי goes into all אריכות there explaining all kinds of it's a מחלוקת ראשונים. לכאורה it makes sense that the same way the רבי has this חקירה בנוגע שביתת בהמתו, the same חקירה would be שביתת כלים, according to Beit Shammai, obviously. Beit Hillel holds there is no שביתת כלים, there's no problem, your כלים don't have to rest. But Beit Shammai that does hold of the דין of שביתת כלים, you could have the same שאלה: What is the פשט שביתת כלים according to Beit Shammai? Is the פשט that the Torah wants gave a דין on the person, you have a חיוב of making sure that your כלים don't do a מלאכה, just like the she'elah and the chakirah by שביתת בהמתו? So that's the peshat, it's a din in the שמירת שבת of the owner. The owner owns a keli, the Torah said you have a din, you are not allowed to have your keli work. It's a din on the keli. The other way to say it, it's a din on the person, and the other way is a din on the keli. What do you mean it's a din on the keli, you mechayev the keli? The same like by behemah. Ela mai the din is the Torah, the Oibershter doesn't want that a keli of a Yid should do melachah on Shabbos, according to Beis Shammai, and they put the responsibility on the person, you make sure to do it. But it's the keli's problem, it's an inyan in the keli. What is the difference between the two? Many differences, just look in the sichah there, but legabei our inyan here, the difference is when the keli does a מלאכה, ובדרך like the behemah does a melachah, is the peshat that the person is not mekayem his שמירת שבת? According to the first way, yeah, there's a דין שמירת שבת on the person, so when the keli does an av melachah, you're doing that av melachah. because the keli can't do a melachah. And what's the pshat the כלי can't do a melacha? The Eibershter doesn't want, it's part of your keeping Shabbos, that you shouldn't do the melacha, and you have an achrayus that your כלי shouldn't do a melacha. So if the כלי does an אב מלאכה, you are to a certain degree doing an אב מלאכה. If you learn the second way, you're not doing the אב מלאכה at all. The כלי is doing the אב מלאכה. You have a responsibility to make sure that the כלי is not doing anything wrong. So if the כלי does an אב מלאכה, we do not say you did an אב מלאכה to a certain degree, the כלי did it, because it's not a din on you. You just didn't keep your responsibility. You have a responsibility to make sure something doesn't happen and you didn't. You did an aveirah, you did an olah, the Torah gave you a responsibility. But the אב מלאכה has nothing to do with you. But the first way, it's your שמירת שבת. And that's the difference between the Tosafot and the Ran. According to the Ran, the Ran holds that this is called an אב מלאכה. The Ran does ask the question that it should say אין שורין before it says אין שורין דיו, it should say what the אב מלאכה is. Why? It's only Maharsha says it's only שביתת כלים. What's the pshat it's only שביתת כלים? According to the Ran, it's שביתת כלים, but שביתת כלים itself is an אב מלאכה. What did I ask before? What do you mean שביתת כלים? שביתת כלים means a כלי cannot do a melacha. And the Ran holds that if the כלי does a melacha, according to Beit Shammai, since Beit Shammai would hold according to the Ran that this is a din on the person, so the melacha of the כלי is my שמירת שבת. So it's my melacha. I didn't do it with my hands, my כלי did it, but it's an extension of me, and mimela it's my melacha. So it's exactly like the rest. There is an אב מלאכה involved here. Whatever אין שורין דיו is an אב מלאכה, it's an אב מלאכה that I'm doing. So it's the same thing like הוצאה, which is an אב מלאכה, you have to know that before you do the din of לא יצא החייט. You have to know you can't make a fire before you say במה טומנין. Ma she'ein ken, Tosafot will learn a different peshat. Tosafot will learn that the taytsh of שביתת כלים is it's not your, not that a melacha that is doing is yours, you have a chiyuv of these melachot. It's a din on the כלי. You have a responsibility to see it. So if the כלי does an אב מלאכה, it's not the peshat you did the אב מלאכה, because it's not you, you just didn't keep your responsibility, true. Umimela, it's different than the rest. It's not an אב מלאכה that you're doing. So this, that's why Tosafot doesn't feel it's a kashya. So Tosafot doesn't ask the she'eilah, because the she'eilah is only from an אב מלאכה. And that's what the Maharsha means. Tosafot learns it's only שביתת כלים. I asked the kashya, what do you mean it's only שביתת כלים? שביתת כלים means a כלי can't do an אב מלאכה. Yeah, the כלי can't do it, but that has nothing to do with me, it's with the כלי. I am not involved in that אב מלאכה. According to the Ran, I am involved, it's an אב מלאכה that I'm doing, because it's my Shabbos, I cannot have, just like I cannot do an אב מלאכה, I cannot have my כלי do it. But I, it's not only I have a responsibility for something else, it's lechat'chilah a din on me. So that's why according to the Ran, the answer of the Maharsha doesn't work. The answer is it's only שביתת כלים and it's not an אב מלאכה. According to the Ran, שביתת כלים is an אב מלאכה. Every every מלאכה that כלי does, I'm doing that אב מלאכה. So it's even though it's only שביתת כלים, but it's connected to אב מלאכה. מה שאין כן, תוספות learns that שביתת כלים is a din separately on the כלי, the Torah doesn't want the כלי to do it, the Torah put a responsibility on me, but I'm not doing the אב מלאכה. That's all Beis Shammai. No, both sides are of Beis Shammai. Beis Hillel holds there is no דין שביתת כלים, fine, so the Torah never made it asur. But Beis Shammai who holds that the Torah did make אסור שביתת כלים, the shaila is what did the Torah mean when the Torah made it asur? Now, like I said, where do I come up with such a shaila? Because the Rebbe makes that שאלה, makes a מחלוקת, I think, between the Rambam and the Rashba, that this not by שביתת כלים, that ענין is on שביתת בהמתו. But the same logic that you have by שביתת בהמתו, you could have the same logic of שביתת כלים. And if that logic works in Likutei Sichos for שביתת בהמתו, it works for שביתת כלים, too. And therefore, you could say that, depending. So the שאלה is, is this שביתת כלים part of when the כלים does something wrong, that מלאכה is כאילו I'm doing, as if saying the כלי is an extension of me, I have a חיוב not to do it, so the אב מלאכה is מיוחס, related to me. But according to the other way, the אב מלאכה is not related. I had a problem, I had a problem of שביתת כלים, true, but it's not at the אב מלאכה. That's one way to explain the מחלוקת between the Ran and Tosafos according to the Maharsha, yeah? Right. Right. And you're saying a בהמה could. True, emet, true, but the idea is the same. The logic that you say there you could say here too. It's not the same, not saying it's the same over there. But just like over there, even though you can't be מחייב a בהמה, בהמה has no חיובים, אלא מאי, the חיוב could be on you, and the שאלה is what kind of חיוב on you? Is it your obligation not to do the מלאכה through the בהמה, or is it your obligation just to watch that the בהמה shouldn't do it? Same thing by the כלים. Then there's another way, and also from Likutei Sichos, another way to explain the מחלוקת between the Ran and Tosafos. In a few places, the Rebbe has a חקירה, בנוגע I'll give the example where לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. There's a דין לפני עור which is going to be בנוגע to Tosafos on דף ג׳ עמוד א׳ also. If a person causes somebody else to do an aveirah, he doesn't do it, but he makes somebody else do it, he helps somebody else do an aveirah, and that other person would not be able to do the aveirah if you wouldn't help him, the Torah says there's a איסור, לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. What's the taytsh of the words? In front of the blind don't put a stumbling block. And what it means is, besides בגשמיות, it means don't make somebody do an aveirah. And if you did it, you are over on the aveirah of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. So the Rebbe has a she'eilah like this: Any aveirah that you cause somebody to do, you're over on לפני עור. Is לפני עור a איסור כללי or a איסור פרטי? I'll taytsh you, I'll explain what I mean. There's a general din, you can't cause somebody to do an aveirah. So you're not allowed to make him מחלל שבת, you can't cause him to eat chametz on Pesach. So you could learn there's one general דין לפני עור. Whatever aveirah you make him do, you're causing him to do something wrong. It's the same aveirah. Whether you cause him to חלל שבת, you cause him to eat chametz, it's the same לפני עור. לפני עור means don't cause somebody to do something wrong. Or you could say no, לפני עור is a פרט in every aveirah. That means if a person caused somebody to מחלל שבת, you're over on לפני עור of Shabbos. So you're מחלל שבת, which aveirah of Shabbos? The לפני עור of Shabbos. If you cause somebody to eat chametz on Pesach, you're over on איסור חמץ. Which aveirah of chametz? There's a איסור אכילה of chametz, you can't eat, you can't have hana'ah, and לפני עור of chametz. They're different aveirot, and there are stricter aveirot and less aveirot, because לפני עור is a פרט in every aveirah. Or the first way is not like that, לפני עור is a general din. So no matter what you're מכשיל, you have an aveirah of causing somebody to do something wrong. I'll give you one of the nafka minas between, it's a very clear nafka mina. Tosafot in Avodah Zarah says a strange din: לפני עור is a דין דאורייתא or a דין דרבנן? It's a דין דאורייתא, לפני עור. There's a דין מסייע לדבר עבירה which, it's not noge'a to what I'm saying, but I'm mentioning it because it's noge'a to Tosafot on דף ג׳: לפני עור, you're only over if the other guy couldn't have done the aveirah without you. But if the other guy could have done it anyway, you're not עובר לפני עור. But mi-derabbanan, you're עובר מסייע לדבר עבירה. It's noge'a to the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch if we're going to talk about it. There's a din not to help somebody do an aveirah even if he'll do it anyway and he could do it anyway, that's derabbanan. But לפני עור in a case where he cannot do it on his own is a דין דאורייתא. Tosafos says such a strange thing in Avodah Zarah at the end of the first perek, that if you, a Yid causes a second person to do a איסור דרבנן, you are oiver on לפני עור דאורייתא. That's very strange! If the whole aveirah that you made the guy do is a איסור דרבנן, how could you be oiver on איסור דאורייתא? Basically, mid'oraisa it's not even an aveirah, right? It's עבירה דרבנן, means mid'oraisa it's not even an aveirah. So how could you be עובר לפני עור מדאורייתא? So if you learn לפני עור is a prat in every aveirah, it can't be! If it's a prat in the עבירה דרבנן, how could it be a d'oraisa? But if לפני עור is the Torah says you are not allowed to cause anybody to do something wrong. Is it wrong to do איסור דרבנן? Yes. And the Torah מדאורייתא says you can't cause somebody to do something wrong, we don't care what the wrong is, whether it's a wrong d'oraisa, derabbanan, you're oiver on לפני עור, the Torah says. Okay. So the bottom line, we have this chakirah on לפני עור. The she'eilah is not only by לפני עור, the she'eilah is also by הוכח תוכיח, the Rebbe says. It says you have to, if you see someone doing something wrong, you have to tell him, and if you don't, you're oiver Of the mitzvah of הוכח תוכיח, is it a prat in every aveirah? If you didn't stop somebody eating chametz, you're oiver on איסור חמץ. Which part of chametz? הוכח תוכיח of chametz. Shabbos? Shabbos. Or no, there's one general din you got to help somebody not to do, you got to be, give a הוכח, got to be rebuke somebody if he does an aveirah, it's one general thing. The same she'eilah the Rebbe says could be in many cases. By חצי שיעור the Rebbe has the she'eilah, other things. Let's apply the she'eilah to שביתת כלים. Where the rabbanan, when the Torah, according to Beis Shammai, there's a din of שביתת כלים. That means you're not allowed to have your keli do any melachah. Is שביתת כלים, that the person has an issur of the keli doing a melachah, is a general din of שביתת כלים, or is שביתת כלים a פרט in every melachah? You can't have your kelim do the melachah of הוצאה, you can't have your kelim do the melachah of הבערה, you can't have your keli... So if your keli does a melachah of of cooking, you are over on איסור בישול, a issur cooking. Which aveirah of cooking? שביתת כלים of cooking. If you're over a different one, you get a פרט in that. If it's a general din, it has nothing to do The the keli is over there's an issur of whatever it is. But what the person is over is a general דין שביתת כלים, no matter what. And that's the machloket between Ran and Tosafot. Tosafot learns that שביתת כלים is a general din. It's not connected to this specific אב. That's what the Maharsha says. That's why Tosafot doesn't ask the question from שביתת from from אין שורין דיו, because Tosafot learns it's different than the rest. The other ones, by carrying or by cooking, if you do it, you'll be over on this on issur melachah מלאכה. By שביתת כלים, you'll be over on what? On שביתת כלים, but you won't be over on the melachah. מה שאין כן the Ran says you will be over on the melachah. It'll be a פרט, a שביתת כלים of the melachah, but you will be over on the melachah. So what's the difference between this and those? That's why the Ran does ask the she'eilah. Okay. That's בנוגע this piece of the Maharsha.

I would like if you have the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, if you can take out the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, the the copy that you had, and we're going to go through it inside. It'll give a completely different insight in peshat in the Mishnah, which seems to be different than Rashi. Okay. I'm going to read inside and I want you to follow. סימן שנ\"ז סעיף א', we'll start right away. מן התורה אינו חייב אלא כשיעקור חפץ מרשות היחיד ויניחנו ברשות הרבים ולהיפך. Mid'oraita you're only chayav if you do an akirah of an object in the רשות היחיד, you pick it up in רשות היחיד, you put it down in the רשות הרבים, or the opposite, you pick it up in רשות הרבים, put in רשות היחיד. אבל העומד באחת משתי רשויות אלו, but if he's standing in one of these two רשויות, you're standing or in the רשות היחיד or רשות הרבים, ופשט ידו לרשות השנייה, and you stick your hand into the other רשות, וחפץ בידו, and you're holding an object, ונטלו הימנו חבירו העומד שם, and the guy standing in the other רשות where your hand is stick stuck out to takes it from you, שזה עקר מרשות זו, this first guy, he's the one that picked it up in this רשות and took it out, וזה הניח ברשות השנייה, the second guy did the הנחה, שניהם פטורין, they're both patur. שנאמר, it says, and the Mishnah doesn't bring this לימוד, but the Gemara later on in דף ג brings this לימוד, that says, מעם הארץ בעשותה, בעשותה means when you do it, the Torah talks about aveirah and if you do it, we learn out from the word בעשותה, you do it, העושה את כולה, you're only chayav if you do the whole מלאכה, ולא העושה את מקצתה, not if you did only part of the melachah. Also, יחיד ועשאה חייב, if one person does the whole melachah, you're chayav. שנים ועשאוה פטורין. The two if two people do it, you're patur. What's the difference between these two cases, doing part of the melachah? Well, obviously if you do part of a melachah, then it's done by two, the other part the other guy does. He says if you do the whole thing, not if you do a part. If one person does it, and not if two people do it. But two different לימודים. You could have the second לימוד, you could have a person do the whole melachah, but two people together do the whole melachah, not half and half. Two people pick up the ספר, and together they make an עקירה in the רשות היחיד and they take it out to put it down. So each one did an עקירה and הנחה, but he didn't do it alone. So you're also patur. You have to do the whole And the first part is if you do the whole melachah, not if you do half of the melachah. Here you did the whole melachah, but together with somebody else. Anyways, you're patur. Then the Alter Rebbe continues, אבל אסור לעשות כן מדברי סופרים. It's patur, but you're not allowed to do it. גזירה שמא יבוא כל אחד ואחד לעשות לעשות מלאכה שלימה בשבת, because we're afraid everybody's gonna, the people might come to do a full melachah. Now how could you come to do a full melachah? Let's understand, this is lashon of Rashi. How could you come to do a full melachah? Meila if you only do the akirah, what are we afraid? If the Chachamim will say the way it's mid'oraita, you're allowed to do an akirah. So yeah, a person could pick up something from רשות היחיד and even take it out to the street, but not put it down, and he's allowed to do it. Know what might happen? He'll forget and put it down. That's that's a very simple thing. But what about making a hanachah only? What could happen there? You made a hanachah, it means the other guy did the akirah already, and we're telling you mid'rabbanan you're not allowed to make the hanachah. What are you gonna afraid you're gonna do? You'll finish off the melachah. You put it down, there's nothing more to do. Nu, who could think of something? Huh? It's a new it's a new melachah, that's something else. You're gonna do a different one, but Next time! That's logic! If we're gonna tell a person you're allowed to do part of a melachah, even though you this itself you'll never come to do the full melachah. But the guy in his mind knows, ah, I could do an hanachah. They told me I could do an hanachah of hotza'ah. So never know, he'll know ah hotza'ah is nisht azoi geferlech, so he'll make an akirah also next time. Which one is worse? The first way is worse, cuz there he might come. And that's why according to Rashi, what does Rashi say in our Mishnah, which is taken from דף ג עמוד א? Rashi asked, how come we're only counting eight, if in the be'emet in the Mishnah you should have 12? How many people do we have when we're telling him you're chayav or patur? How many things? Not eight. The Mishnah says two that turns into four, so it's four, and then two it turns into four, so it's four and four is eight. Truth is there's 12. Why? Cuz every time we say that one guy did the akirah, one guy did the hanachah, there are two people who we're telling you you're both patur. And there are four cases, right, in the second half of the Mishnah. Each case has two people involved, and they're both patur. So how much is it? If we only could count we if we know our math without a calculator, two times four? Some people forget, cuz you never use your head, is eight. So from the second half of the Mishnah, you have eight cases. So you have two chiyuvim and eight peturim? Two means four chiyuvim and eight peturim. So how do you have eight, you should have 12? So Rashi says, quotes from the Gemara later, the way Rashi learns, have to tell you as an הקדמה, the Riva in that Gemara learns different and Tosafot will bring the Riva later, but before all, and answers that we're not counting all the cases to be patur, we're only counting, what does Rashi say? Only the akirot! Every case is an one guy did an akirah, one guy did an hanachah. We're only counting the akirot! Why? So Rashi says the לשון, שהן תחלת המלאכה ואיכא למימר שמא יגמרנה, cuz that's the beginning, he might finish it. But by the hanachah, we're not afraid he might finish it. But then you could ask, if you're not afraid he might finish it, why did the Chachamim make it asur? So it's also a chashash. They did make it asur, but it's not as bad, cuz he might might do it next time, a full melachah. Fine. But al kol panim, this is the din the Alter Rebbe and this is the din from our Mishnah. But then the Alter Rebbe comes and says the next din. היה עומד באחת משתי רשויות, if this guy is standing in one רשות, ופשט ידו לרשות חבירו, and he stuck his hand into the second רשות, ונטל החפץ מידו והוציא, and he took the object from the other guy's hand, it was standing laying in the other guy's hand, he took it out, took it into this reshut where he is standing, לרשות שעומד בה, he took it to the reshut he is standing. So, what did he do so far? There's a guy standing outside, let's say, holding something, I stick my hand out, and I take it from him and I put it in. What did I do? I did an akirah. Now, I didn't put it down in my reshut. So the Alter Rebbe says, אפילו לא הניחו בארץ, even if he didn't put it down, הואיל והוא מונח בידו, since it's in my hand, הרי הוא כמונח בארץ, it's as if I put it down on the ground. Why? שהיד נגררת אחר הגוף, because the hand is extension of my body, and הגוף עומד בארץ, the guf is on the ground. So therefore if I take it inside into the רשות היחיד and I didn't put it down, I took it, I mean akirah in the רשות הרבים, I took it in and kept it in my hand, you're chayav, because it's as if I put it down, because I'm standing on the ground, that's as if I put it on the ground. The Alter Rebbe adds, ואפילו אם הוא עומד ברשות הרבים וידו שהחפץ בתוכה למעלה מי׳ טפחים, we know the din that even though there is a רשות הרבים, but the רשות הרבים only goes up to ten tefachim, anything beyond ten tefachim is not רשות הרבים, is a מקום פטור. So what happens if I'm standing outside, the ani, and he puts his hand inside, takes out from the בעל הבית, from his hand, makes an akirah into רשות היחיד, takes it out to the רשות הרבים, but and he doesn't put it down, and he's holding it. So we just said, if you're holding it, it's as if you put it down. But he's holding it very high. He's holding it like this. י' tefachim is like here, he's holding like this. So let's say he put it down, but where did he put it down? In מקום פטור. So he should be patur. Zagt der Alter Rebbe: No, הרי זה חייב. שכן משא בני קהת שהיו נושאים את הארון על כתפיהם והיה הארון כולו למעלה מי' טפחים באויר. If you have the Gemara, please do me a favor and open up the Gemara in פרק המצניע. I'll tell you the דף. דף צ\"ב. Open up the Gemara דף צ\"ב. You see the Mishnah there. המוציא בין בימינו בין בשמאלו If someone carries out, whether with his right hand, with his left hand, בתוך חיקו in his pocket, או על כתפו or on his shoulders, חייב שכן משא בני קהת, because in the Mishkan, everything is learned from the Mishkan. The בני קהת carried the ארון. Where did they hold the ארון? On their shoulders. So you're chayav on the shoulders. So let's skip the end of the Mishnah, go to straight to the Gemara. אמר ר' אלעזר: המוציא משא למעלה מעשרה טפחים If you carry something higher than עשרה טפחים, חייב. Why? למעלה מעשרה, למעלה מעשרה is a מקום פטור. שכן משא בני קהת. Then the Gemara goes on: How do we know by Bnei Kehat the aron was so high? Well, the leviim were 10 amot high, whatever, all kinds of cheshbonot the Gemara makes. But that's what it is, we learn it out. So the Alter Rebbe says, so therefore, if you take out from the רשות היחיד, you make you make an akirah from the רשות היחיד into the רשות הרבים and you keep it in your hand, it's as if you put it down, even if it's למעלה מעשרה טפחים. Why? Because that's a special limud. But that's all because you're standing in רשות הרבים. So if you're standing in רשות היחיד and you're taking from רשות הרבים, then obviously makes no difference where you're holding, because רשות היחיד is no difference to anything. רשות היחיד עולה עד לרקיע. רשות היחיד goes all the way. So you took it out, and since you're standing in רשות היחיד, it's as if you put it down. The chidush is that even if it's in רשות הרבים, and it's למעלה מעשרה טפחים, which is normally מקום פטור, still you're חייב. Okay. Skip ג' and ד' because that goes different dinim here. כשפשט ידו לרשות שניה If a guy puts his hand out to another רשות, והחפץ בידו again holding something in his hand, which means he made an עקירה, והניח ביד חבירו העומד שם and he puts it down in the other guy's hand. So if he put it down in his hand, is he חייב or פטור? What would you assume from the Mishnah? No, the other guy did nothing. The other guy just held out his hand. The guy who took it, take it from here, and you put it out onto the other guy's hand. See, before we gave another example: you take it from him and you bring it in, and we said in that case the hand is as even if he didn't put it down, it's as if it's hanachah. I'm saying the opposite now. You pick something up and you put it down on someone else's hand in the other רשות. What's the din here? What's obvious? אודאי חייב. It's akirah and hanachah. הוא חייב, שעשה עקירה והנחה, וחבירו פטור. The other guy did nothing, he's פטור. Okay. Now ו', so so far so good. אם הוא עומד ברשות היחיד וחבירו ברשות הרבים If you're standing in reshut hayachid and the other guy in רשות הרבים, והניח חפץ ביד חבירו You take something in reshut hayachid, you made an akirah, you put it down in the other guy's hand in the reshut harabim. We said you're chayav. What happens if the other guy's hand in the reshut harabim is higher than עשרה טפחים? What would you think, so far? We said before that by the גוף makes no difference if it's higher. So he says here like this: והניחה ביד חבירו והיא גבוהה למעלה מעשרה טפחים, שהוא מקום פטור, שניהם פטורים. The guy who took it is patur, because he didn't do anything. Even the guy who put it down is patur. He didn't make a hanachah. He did, but he made a hanachah in a makom patur. Why? The Alter Rebbe says: שאף שלגבי חבירו עצמו אין ידו נחשבת למקום פטור Even though we said before that if I take something from outside and I put it in if I take for me from inside, if the guy standing outside takes from in and takes it out, even though he took it out higher than עשרה טפחים, we consider it in רשות הרבים לפי שנגררת אחר גופו העומד על קרקע רשות הרבים כמו שנתבאר, because the hand is connected to the person where he's standing, מכל מקום לגבי אדם אחר, לגבי another person, גם גופו הוא מקום פטור למעלה מעשרה. That's only the case where if I take it to me, but if I'm putting something down on him, then depends, if it's higher than ten, it's a makom patur, you're patur. If it's lower than ten, you're chayav. In the other case makes no difference because he took it. So that's the din that the Alter Rebbe says here: if you took it to yourself wherever you hold it, he didn't even put it down, it's a hanachah, and even למעלה מעשרה טפחים it's a hanachah. But if you're putting it on somebody else, it's not like that. It's the same thing, any part of the body. No, that's למטה מעשרה is no problem, you're for sure chayav, we're talking about למעלה מעשרה. Yeah, there's no problem. But he says you can't, mikol makom you can't do it miderabbanan. And he goes into different פרטים here. Let's skip a few lines in the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch. ויש אומרים now the Alter Rebbe brings another shita: שגם לגבי אחרים אין ידו ושאר גופו נחשב מקום פטור The second shita argues and says that even לגבי somebody else, למעלה מעשרה טפחים is not called a makom patur. כמו שאינו נחשב לגבי עצמו Just like for yourself we said if you're bringing it out to yourself it's not a makom patur, the same thing for somebody else. וכן שאר בעלי חיים אינם מקום פטור אפילו הם גבוהים מעשרה Even animals which are higher than ten tefachim, if you put it on top of them, it's called putting down on רשות הרבים, not on a מקום פטור, אלא הרי הן כקרקע רשות הרבים שאין עמהם עליה and the same thing by a carmelit. Okay, so now here we have a machloket: if you put it down on somebody else, what's the din? Is this din that we learn out from משא בני קהת that your guf is on the floor always, even if it's למעלה מעשרה, is it only, the first shita says it's only if you're taking it to yourself, but if you're putting it on somebody else it's not, and the second shita, the יש אומרים hold, that even if you take it to somebody else, even if you put it down למעלה מעשרה טפחים, you are chayav. Okay. העומד בפנים You're standing, let's start ז now. You're standing inside ופושט ידו או אחד משאר איבריו לחוץ and you're standing inside and you stuck out your hand, let's say, or any other part of the body outside, אפילו הן למטה מעשרה a new din. Not if you give it. No. If you take it out, it's akirah. When you take it inside, yeah, it's a hanachah. Because you're standing, you're resting. In any case No, it's only for another reshut. Yeah, not in the same reshut, only another reshut. If you take it into another reshut, then it's a hanachah. If it's the same reshut, it's not called a hanachah, cuz you want to say that he made a hanachah in the same reshut, so what's the difference, then he made a new akirah? Yeah. Yeah, if you take it into the other reshut and where you're standing. Yeah. We're going to go into more פרטים here. If you're standing inside and you stick your hand out לחוץ אפילו הן למטה מעשרה This is the case, takeh. You're standing inside and you're putting your hand out. Even if it's למטה מעשרה, it's a מקום פטור לדברי הכל. Everyone agrees, no machloket that it's called a מקום פטור even if it's למטה מעשרה. אפילו לגבי אותו האדם עצמו Even לגבי the person himself לענין שמותר לו להכניס לתוך ידו חפץ המונח ברשות הרבים If you have, you're standing inside and you stick your hand out and you want to pick something up from the רשות הרבים and you're holding it, you're allowed to. Likhorah you could ask a kashya: if you're standing in רשות היחיד and you're going to take something and pick it up from רשות הרבים, and we said before your hand goes after your body, so it's almost like saying that your hand is a רשות היחיד now, so when you pick it up from the street, you're taking it from רשות היחיד רשות הרבים, and you're putting it into your hand, it's a רשות היחיד. But that's not true. When we said before your hand is a רשות היחיד if you're standing in רשות היחיד, it's only if your hand is in the same רשות as you are. But here, your hand is outside. So here, it's a מקום פטור. שאין ידו נגררת אחר גופו להיות לרשות היחיד כמוהו, the hand is not considered a רשות היחיד like your body is, הואיל והם ברשויות מחולקים, מחולקות, since they're different רשויות. So it's not a רשות היחיד. Now maybe it's so what, because you're you're in a רשות היחיד, where is your hand? רשות הרבים. Nu, so let your hand be a רשות הרבים? וגם אינה כרשות הרבים, שהיא בתוכה, where the where the thing is in, הואיל ואגודה בגופו, העומד ברשות היחיד. It can't be a רשות הרבים, it's connected to you and you're in a רשות היחיד. So, איז דאס נישט אהין און נישט אהער. It's not רשות היחיד where you're standing because it's not in your רשות. It's not a רשות הרבים because after all it's connected to you. So therefore, לפיכך הוא מקום פטור. So it's a מקום פטור. So therefore, if a person picks it up there, there is no problem. He stands in רשות היחיד, picks it up from רשות הרבים, it's a מקום פטור. So now, we have a problem. One of the cases in the Mishnah is if a guy stick sticks his hand out to the רשות הרבים, empty, and the other guy puts it in and he takes it in, what's the din? Patur aval asur. What's the case? The guy stands inside, sticks his hand out, the עני puts something in outside, and he takes it back. So both of them are doing an aveirah. It's not chayav, but both of them are doing an aveirah. The guy outside, what did he put it into? Hand. Which is what? Less than the ground, so it's a Which Which we said No! We said now his hand is in a different רשות than him. What is it? It's a מקום פטור. Nu, so what did the guy do? He put it into a מקום פטור. We said the guy can't do, not allowed to do it. Since I'm going to take it in, he put it into my hand and I'm taking it in, so he did an איסור דרבנן of making an עקירה, and I did the איסור דרבנן of making the הנחה, but it's a מקום פטור we just said. ומה שאסרו לזה ואפילו לאחר ליתן חפץ לידו מרשות הרבים שיכניסנה לרשות היחיד, and what the reason why is takeh asur to put in the hand and I'll take it לרשות היחיד, אף על פי שמכניס ממקום פטור לרשות היחיד, what's going to happen now? It's in my hand. He put it in my hand, it's a מקום פטור. So what's going to So what is it really? He picked it up in רשות הרבים, put it in my hand, so he put it from רשות הרבים to No, to מקום פטור. Then I'm going to take from there and put it inside, so I'll be taking from a מקום פטור into רשות היחיד. So what's the problem? אף על פי שמכניס ממקום פטור לרשות הרבים, לרשות היחיד, he's taking inside, so he's taking it לרשות היחיד, איסור זה משום גזירה, it's a גזירה, שמא יבוא לעשות בעצמו עקירה מרשות הרבים והנחה ברשות היחיד. It's a גזירה. טאקע באמת it's a it's a din of a מקום פטור, but it doesn't matter, it's a גזירה. And he says, and that's אסור because you can't take from רשות הרבים to רשות היחיד even through a מקום פטור. It's a din like that, מדרבנן, like it says in סימן שמו סעיף ו. אבל אם הוציא חפץ בידו מרשות היחיד, listen to this case, if he took out something from with his hand from רשות היחיד, אפילו אם נחה ידו תחילה באויר רשות הרבים, he takes something from his hand, puts it out in רשות הרבים, he stops, and he lets it stop there, so lechora that should be a הנחה. So what happened here? And it's למעלה מעשרה. He he took it from רשות היחיד, took his hand out, and stopped. So now it's a הנחה in a מקום פטור. Even not למעלה מעשרה, even lower than עשרה, why? Because he's in a different רשות than his hand, so what's his hand? Connected to his hand is him. No. His hand is a מקום פטור. Because when he's in two different רשויות, his hand is a מקום פטור. So לכאורה what happened here? He took from רשות היחיד, put it into a מקום פטור. אין זו חשובה הנחה במקום פטור. Because what did we say before? If a guy picks up something in רשות היחיד, takes out to the רשות הרבים and he puts it down, he's חייב. What happens if he does this: he picks it up in רשות היחיד, goes out like this, stops, and then he puts it down on the floor of רשות הרבים? Again, he takes it to here, puts it out, stops, puts it down. Should be פטור, because he made an akirah in reshus hayachid, made hanachah in makom patur, then he made an akirah in a makom patur and made an hanachah in reshus harabim. Chayav. Why? But we said the hand is in a makom patur as long as the hand is in a different reshus. So he says, לפי שהנחה על היד, these are all יסודות which is נוגע, הנחה על היד, putting down on your hand, אינה חשובה הנחה, אלא בחפץ שהונח לה ממקום אחר. When is a חפץ in the hand, when it stopped, called a hanachah? If it was put down on it. אבל אם חפץ שהיה עולה בתחילה ברשות זו, but if you have an object that's already there in this רשות, והושיטה לרשות ב׳ and you took it to another רשות, כיוון שאין שיטה זו חשובה כאן הנחה ליד עצמה, just like with regard to the hand, you can't say the hand rested in a different reshus, why not? Because it's connected to you, שהרי היא תלויה כאן באוויר, it's in the אוויר and it didn't rest and it's connected to you, הוא הדין שאינה חשובה הנחה לחפץ שבה. So the חפץ is also not called that rested in the makom patur. שהשטת היד אינה דומה לעמידת גופו. Sticking out, see if a person has something on himself and he rests, that's called a hanachah. A guy walks with something and he stops, it's called a hanachah, but that's only on the body. The Gemara has a whole sugya later, if הנחת גופו, עקירת גופו הוי עקירה, הנחת גופו, if you have something and you rest, but not on the hand which is hanging in the air. Because by it's not like your body stops, שכשאעמד לפוש עמידה זו חשובה הנחה, if you walk and you have something on the body and you stop, it's called hanachah, if you stop to rest. גם על החפץ שעל גופו, even on the חפץ, אי שעל ידו, אי שעל ידו, that's on the hand, why? לפי שהגוף עצמו עומד ונח על גבי קרקע, because the body is stopping and resting. מה שאין כן בהושטת היד לבדה, but if you're not walking and you're just sticking out your hand, שתלויה ועומדת באוויר, it's in it's in the air, there it's different. So that's so what do we see now, that the hand, what kind of din does the hand have klal? Well it depends, if the hand in the same reshus like I by you and you're taking it in... If you're taking something from the outside and you're bringing it in into the same reshus with your body, what's the din? What's the din of the hand? The same reshus as you, we said the first thing, and you are chayav. If you're doing it, taking in and putting on a somebody else, what's the din there? And if you put it on top in the למעלה מעשרה, they're two shittot, that was a machloket. Now we're saying if the hand is in a different רשות than you, what is it? It's a מקום פטור. But not always will it be called that it's הנחה במקום פטור. If you're taking it out from this רשות and you're putting it out, it's not called a הנחה במקום פטור. Mah she'ein kein if your hand was empty inside and you stuck it out and you picked something up from there, that's called that you picked it up in a מקום פטור. ויש אומרים שידו הפשוטה לרשות אחרת הרי היא לגמרי כאותה רשות. There's a different opinion that if you stick your hand out to another רשות, it's mamash like that רשות, אם רשות היחיד רשות היחיד, אם רשות הרבים רשות הרבים. הוא הדין לאחד משאר אבריו, the same with other parts of the body, אף על פי שמחובר לגופו העומד ברשות אחרת, even though it's connected to your body someplace else. Before we said that because it's connected to you it's not called you're רשות, I mean it's not called that רשות. It's not called your רשות either, because it's outside, but it's not that רשות either, it's a מקום פטור. And this opinion says not. ומה שפשט ידו מרשות לרשות וחפץ אינו חייב עד שיניח החפץ על גבי קרקע. Now he asks a she'elah, why is the din that if you stick out your hand from one רשות to another with holding an object, you're not chayav till you put it down on that area על גבי קרקע, או ליד חבירו, or in someone else's hand, אבל אם חבירו נטל ממנו, if I stick something out and the other guy takes it from me, what's the din? What's the din in the Mishnah? If I take something from רשות היחיד, I stick it out, and a guy outside takes it from me, פטור, אף על פי שהחפץ מונח בידו, even though it's in his hand, and what did we say, the second opinion now holds that any hand wherever it is is that רשות. So the moment I stuck it out into the רשות, so I stuck it out into that רשות, so even though someone else took it, I should be chayav. אף על פי שהחפץ מונח בו שיחשב כאותה רשות לגמרי, it's like that רשות according to this opinion, והרי הוציא מרשות לרשות, and you took it out, זהו לפי שלא היתה עדיין הנחה לחפץ באותה רשות. It's not because it's not that רשות, you know what's missing? הנחה. You didn't put it down. שהנחת החפץ בו אינה חשובה הנחה, הואיל והיה בידו מתחילה. Putting it down is not considered putting it down. This is what the Alter Rebbe says. So this is basically, I picked it, so it's נוגע to know when you come back to our Mishnah now, and the Mishnah tells all this dinim, it's not so pashut as it seems, you have to know all these cases.

There's one thing that it seems from Rashi that Rashi does not agree to what we said before. We said before that if the guy Guy sticks his hand out, takes something, let's say they have a guy in רשות היחיד, the עשיר, sticks his hand out, takes something out from the עני, and brings it in. So he made the akirah outside, brings it in, according to the Alter Rebbe, the way we said before. When is he chayav? Only when he just puts it into the other רשות? He takes it from the עני, makes an akirah, brings it in. Even though he didn't put it on the floor, he's chayav? Even though he didn't put it down on the floor, he's chayav. Look at Rashi. Rashi says here בנוגע this case that if נטל מתוכה והוציא, if he took out from him and he took it out, if the עני stuck his hand into the רשות היחיד, took out from the hand of the בעל הבית, and he took it out, the Mishnah says chayav. So Rashi adds, הוציא החפץ והניח ברשות הרבים, meaning he put it down. Why does Rashi say that? דעביד ליה עקירה ברשות היחיד והנחה ברשות הרבים. So Rashi says because he put it down, so he has a full melachah. He did עקירה ברשות היחיד, עקירה ברשות היחיד by the עני, and הנחה ברשות הרבים. But why does he have to put it down? We just said if you don't put it down that's just as good, that's what the Alter Rebbe says. So it would seem that that Rashi holds different than what the different than the shita that the Alter Rebbe brings. It's not a raayah. Tell you why. The Gemara later on has a big she'eilah whether עקירת גופו כעקירת חפץ or הנחת גופו. If your body moves without you don't pick it up on the floor, but you have something on you and you're standing and then you start walking, is that called an akirah? And the maskana of the Gemara, yes, עקירת גופו כעקירת חפץ, it's called an akirah. So when you're standing and you have something on, a guy is standing outside inside and he has standing and then he starts walking and walks out and stops, he's chayav, he did an עקירה and הנחה. But it was not so clear, the maskana of the Gemara is. We didn't learn the Gemara yet. This whole din that we said that when you put your hand out, you take something and you bring it in, you don't have to put it down to be חייב, the fact that it's in your hand is חייב already is based on this din of עקירת גופו כעקירת חפץ, because לפועל it's your body, even though you never put it down, but your hand is called הנחה. At this point in the Mishnah, we don't know that yet. We didn't come to that maskana yet. Rashi has a klal a lot of times that Rashi writes pshat in the Mishnah not according to the maskana. And the reason many times is pashut. If Rashi is going to write the maskana, we won't understand the Gemara. What made the Gemara come to a maskana? The Gemara had a kushya on the Mishnah, so the Gemara, \"Oh, must be this in this case.\" If Rashi will write it right away, you won't understand what the Gemara's kushya is. I I already learned that the pshat is so-and-so. So Rashi leaves it. So here, Rashi writes, it's possible that Rashi writes this because Rashi is going before we know that עקירת חפץ כעקירת גופו עקירת גופו כעקירת חפץ, הנחת so therefore Rashi says if you put it down, for sure you're חייב. Later on when you come to the maskana, then takke if you go back now and look at the din, ein hachi nami. Could be Rashi holds that you don't have to put it down because the fact that it's in your hand is good enough. The שאלה is that the Bartenura, the Rav on Mishnayot, he doesn't have that klal, because he's not writing on the Gemara, he's writing on the Mishnah. So he writes always pshat in the Mishnah according to the maskana, and he says the same thing as Rashi. He says that the case is only when you put it down. So could be he paskens like those Rishonim, see, the Alter Rebbe doesn't, could be he paskens like those Rishonim that you do not say that the hand and you bring it inside, and the hand is the same רשות as you are, that that's considered already הנחה. So if you don't pasken like that, then he has to say that way. Okay.