Dear Kollel Iyun HaDaf,
The Mishna on Shabbos 75b discusses "Ode Klal Acher" regarding the Melacha of Hotza'a.
The Sefa of the Mishna says that if one stores an object that others find too insignificant or too small to be stored, then if that person carries that object from one Reshus to another, he is liable to bring a Chatas.
This seems strange. The way the Halacha is set up in the Mishna has the potential to produce conflicting (and bewildering) decisions by the Beis Din.
For example, two people might carry the identical object, one is Chayav to bring a Chatas and one is Patur.
Even worse, one person carries a larger version of an object and one carries a smaller version of the same object - it is possible that the one carrying the smaller object is Chayav while the one carrying the larger version is Patur. People seeing these rulings would be confused.
Why didn't the Chachamim say, Batla Da'ato Etzel Kol Adam? This would make the rulings uniform and less confusing. See Tosafos 74b d"h Chachma Yesayra Sha'ani
Barry Robinson, Skokie, IL, USA
I will answer your question, as is the Jewish way, with another question.
Let us say that your suggestion was indeed the Halachah. Do you think that this would prevent the situation of two people doing the same exact action on Shabbos, while one would bring a Chatas and one would not? The answer is definitely not, for many reasons.
One reason is the concept of "Melachah She'Ainah Tzricha l'Gufa" where the Melachah that is done is the same exact Melachah as a regular Melachah, with the difference solely a matter of intent. If the intent was "Tzricha l'Gufa" a Chatas is required, and if not a Chatas is not required (according to almost all Poskim who Pasken like Rebbi Shimon).
One could give a similar example using the law of "Davar She'eino Miskaven," where one person knew that he would perform the Melachah, and one person did not (the former would bring a Chatas while the second would not).
In this regard, Shabbos is very different from other prohibitions, as the Torah did not forbid a specific amount of something but rather an amount that is Chashuv. Similarly the Torah did not forbid an action but rather "Meleches Machsheves Asrah Torah." Throughout Hilchos Shabbos we see that the thoughts and acts of an individual matter. Therefore, when people see that someone is Chayev a Chatas for being Mechalel Shabbos, it is clear that his individual thoughts and actions are taken into account (aside from Chachmah Yeseirah, which is considered a strange action, akin to a Shinui).
Regards to the shiur (especially the guy from Pottawattami),
Yaakov Montrose
There are numerous cases of two people doing the same thing where one is Chayav a Korban, and the other, Patur. Take for example, where one of them was Meizid and one, Shogeg, or where one was warned, and the other wasn't.
When it comes to d'Oraysos, the Chachamim cannot say 'Batlah Da'ato' for reasons of 'Lo P'lug', since the Rabbanan do not have the right to obligate or to exempt someone from a Korban. Either it applies (min ha'Torah) or it doesn't. 'Lo P'lug' is generally confined to de'Rabbanans.
So what we have to explain is why it ('Batlah Da'ato') applies earlier with regard to spinning directly from an animal's back, but not here?
It seems to me that as you suggest, the S'vara of 'Batlah Da'ato ... ' applies in most cases, because if most people don't do something, then it is not considered a Ma'aseh regarding somebody who does. And it is only here, where one is generally Chayav for carrying the object in question; and it is only because of the Shi'ur that most people are Patur, that 'Batlah Da'ato' does apply. In such a case, the Mishnah teaches us that if someone considers less than the Shi'ur Chashuv, and actually makes the object Chashuv by putting it away, that he is Chayav.
In short, a person can turn less than the Shi'ur into a Shi'ur, but he cannot turn a non-Ma'aseh into a Ma'aseh.
be'Virchas Kol Tuv
Eliezer Chrysler.