(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Shabbos 90


QUESTION: Rashi says that Beis Din is not required to stop a child from eating Neveilos, but one may not actively give him something forbidden to eat. How can it be that we are not required to stop the child from eating something forbidden? What about the Mitzvah of Chinuch and our obligation to teach the child to follow the ways of the Torah?


(a) The RAMBAM explains that the Mitzvah of Chinuch applies only to the father of the child. His father *is* required to stop him from eating something forbidden. No one else, though, is required to stop him.

(b) The RASHBA (Yevamos 114a) and TOSFOS (Shabbos 121a) explain that our Gemara is referring only to a child who has not yet reached the age of Chinuch. A child who has reached the age of Chinuch, though, must be stopped from eating forbidden food.

(c) The RASHBA adds that one must train the child to do *actions*. One is not required to enjoin the child to *stop* doing actions.

HALACHAH: The SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 343) cites the Rambam's opinion that only the father is commanded to stop the child from sinning. The REMA cites both opinions, with the Rambam's opinion as a "Yesh Omrim."
QUESTION: The Mishnah teaches that whatever quantity of an item (such as seeds) that a person considers significant is considered to be the measure for which he will be Chayav for Hotza'ah on Shabbos. The Gemara asks why the Mishnah teaches this Halachah by saying that the person first stored it away ("ha'Matzni'a") and then took it out into Reshus ha'Rabim on Shabbos. The Mishnah should have simply said that he took it out with intention to plant it, and that intention alone makes it significant and he is Chayav for Hotza'ah. Why did the Mishnah have to say that he first stores it away?

Abaye answers that the Mishnah is referring to a case where he forgot that he stored it (or why he had stored it), and nevertheless, he is still Chayav when he brings it into Reshus ha'Rabim. Rashi adds that in addition to explaining why the Mishnah said "ha'Matzni'a," Abaye is answering a second question -- why our Mishnah bothers to teach us at all that the significance a person attaches to an object determines its measure for Hotza'ah, when the Mishnah earlier (75b) already taught us that.

What in the Gemara revealed to Rashi that the Gemara is bothered by this second question?

Rashi was bothered by a question on the Gemara. Why did Abaye answer that the person *did not remember* why he had stored away the object? Abaye should have simply answered that the person who was once Motzi the object took it out without any explicit intentions (as Rashi DH Leisnei explained)!

Rashi understands, therefore, that had the Gemara said that he was Motzi the object with no intention to plant it, we would still have the question from the Mishnah earlier (75b). Abaye answers that this Mishnah is adding that even if he *forgot* that he was Matzni'a it for a purpose, he is still Chayav.

Next daf


This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network
Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper,
provided that this notice is included intact.
For information on subscriptions, archives, and other Shema Yisrael
Classes, send mail to daf@shemayisrael.co.il

Shema Yisrael Torah Network
Jerusalem, Israel

In the U.S.:
Tel. (908) 370-3344
Fax. (908) 367-6608

Toll free line for dedications: 1-800-574-2646