1) Concerning a case where someone eats mezonos in one place and changes to a seconds place, we seem to pasken (quoted in 'Halachos of Brachos' and VeZot Habracha) that because mezonos might require a bracha in its place, we don't require a new bracha before the person continues eating mezonos in the new location. However, why is this not a Sfeik Sfeika Lechayeiv? Firstly, we have a sfeika ledina whether halacha is like Rav Chisda or Rav Sheshet (SA 178 and 184). Even if the halcha is like Rav Chisda, we still don't know whether mezonos requires a bracha in place or not. Isn't this similair to one counting during the day on Sefirat Ha'omer where we let him continue with a bracha fetrwards since it is a sefiek sefeika lechayeiv?

2) on 102. The Gemarrah brings Tanya Kavatei Derav Chisda and discusses how wine is not subect to shinui makom. Since this seems to prove that wine is in the category of things which require a bracha achrona in place, the Shitot which hold that it is not in that category (Tos, Rabbeinu Chananel) must explain this. The paralel girsa (brought in the Rosh) has Tanya Kavatei Derbi Yochanon, but many are bothered by this since we have already rejeccted Rebi Yochanon. To answer the Ba'al Hameor says we just remove this whole section from the Shas, but the RaCH has just Tanya (without the kavatei). According to the RaCH, isn't there still the problem of supporting Rabbi Yochanon's shita? Namely, we rejected him before since we had a Stam that disagreed with him, but with the RaCH's girsa, we have a Stam which supports him, so doesn't that save him from the Teyuvta?

kol tuv,

Matthew Wieder, Philadelphia, USA