Dear Betzalel,

Rashi 8b DH Ella writes that (according to the possibility mentioned in the Gemara that Rachuv is better than Manhig one only says that "Meshichah" ("pulling"- this is what Manhig is as Rashi DH Manhig writes) is "Koneh" in a case where there is no Rachuv, but where there is Rachuv the latter is preferable to Manhig (see also note 472 to Chidushei Rashba).

Rashba explains this and writes that when the Gemara stated that either Rachuv alone or Manhig alone are both Koneh, one must say that the reason Rachuv is Koneh is because the animal moves due to the weight of the rider sitting on it. Therefore, Rachuv is equivalent to walking with the animal and leading it along("Manhig be'Raglav") because in both cases the animal moves because of the person.

Therefore, it is possible that Rachuv is better than Manhig because it possesses two advantages:

1. The animal is moving because of the person.

2. The person is holding the leash of the animal (Rashba writes that this is what the Gemara means when it states that Rachuv "is holding it"). Rashba writes that the reason the Gemara only mentioned this second reason when it discussed the possibility that Rachuv is better than Manhig, is because it was only necessary to mention an advantage which is exclusive to Rachuv.

Rashba explains further that the reason that it may be that Rachuv cancels out Manhig, even though as a rule Manhig is Koneh, is because since both 1 and 2 are present in Rachuv it could be that Manhig now possesses neither 1 or 2 because even though normally Manhig does constitute 1 , nevertheless since the animal is now moving because of the rider it may be that it is not moving because of the Manhig at all.

Kol Tuv

D. Bloom