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 one is not required to stop the child from eating something forbidden? We know that the Mitzvah of Chinuch obligates him to teach the child to fulfill and obey the Mitzvos 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 in Yevamos (114a) and TOSFOS in Shabbos (121a) explain that the Gemara here refers 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 of Mitzvos. One is not required to enjoin the child to stop doing actions.

QUESTION: The Mishnah teaches that the 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 the object significant and makes the person Chayav for Hotza'ah. Why does the Mishnah say that he first stored it away?

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

What is Rashi's inference from the Gemara that the Gemara is bothered by this second question?

ANSWER: Rashi's inference is based on a problem with the words of the Gemara. Why does Abaye answer that the person did not remember why he had stored away the object? Abaye should have answered simply that the person who carried the object out did so without any explicit intention (as Rashi explains in DH Leisnei).

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