Question (Rav Masnah): Why does our Mishnah count a total of eight Yetzi'os (including Peturim) - there are 12 (two Chiyuvim for the Oni (a), two Chiyuvim for the Ba'al ha'Bayis (b), and four Peturim for each, in (c) and (d))!

Counter-question: If you count more than eight, you should count 16 (also count Peturim when the other party is Chayav, i.e. two more for the Ba'al ha'Bayis (a), and two more for the Oni (b))!

Answer: I do not count those four Peturim in the Reisha, for they are permitted (regarding Shabbos; indeed, if the other party is a Yisrael, it is forbidden to cause him to transgress);

I count the eight Peturim in the Seifa (when both of them are Peturim), for they are forbidden [mid'Rabanan].

Question: Is it really true that the Peturim in the Reisha are permitted?!

(Shmuel): All Peturim in the Mishnayos of Shabbos are forbidden [mid'Rabanan], with three exceptions, which are permitted - 'trapping' a deer (that is already trapped), trapping a snake, and causing pus to leave [a wound].

Answer: Shmuel teaches the three actions that are Patur and permitted - he does not address cases of passivity (e.g. an object is taken from or deposited in one's hand).

Repeat of question: (Why does our Mishnah count a total of eight,) there are 12!

Answer (Abaye): Our Mishnah only counts Akiros, for these could lead to Chiyuvim (if he will do Hanachah), it does not count Hanachos, for these cannot lead to Chiyuvim (since the one who did Hanachah did not do Akirah).

Question: In the Seifa, why are both Peturim - together, they did a Melachah!

Answer (Beraisa - Rebbi): "Me'Am ha'Aretz ba'Asosah" - one who does an entire Melachah is Chayav, not one who does part of a Melachah;

If one did a Melachah he is liable, if two people did it they are exempt.

(R. Chiya bar Gamda): "Ba'Asosah" - if one did a Melachah he is liable, if two people did it they are exempt.

Question (Rav): If Reuven loaded food and drink on Shimon's body and Shimon went outside (from Reshus ha'Yachid to Reshus ha'Rabim), what is the law?

If Akirah of his own [laden] body like Akirah of an object, Shimon is liable; if not, he is exempt.

Answer (Rebbi): He is liable, [Akirah of] his body is not like [Akirah of] his hand (the Mishnah exempts an Oni who withdraws his hand after the Ba'al ha'Bayis put something in it).

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: His body rests on the ground, his hand does not (Rashi; Tosfos - the status of his hand is [partially] determined by his body, if his hand is in a different Reshus what is inside is not Munach (at rest)).

R. Chiya (to Rav): You should only ask about the tractate your Rebbi is teaching - if Rebbi was not a great Chacham, he might have answered incorrectly, and he would be embarrassed!

[Fortunately,] Rebbi is a great Chacham, he answered well.

(Beraisa): If Reuven was loaded with food and drink from before Shabbos (this is like when someone put something in Reuven's hand, he cannot be Chayav for such an 'Akirah'), and on Shabbos he went outside (Tosfos - after dark he stopped to rest, then finished the Hotza'ah), he is liable, for his body is unlike his hand (rather, Akirah of his laden body is like Akirah of an object).

(Abaye): It is clear to me that a man's hand is not considered like Reshus ha'Rabim (when he is in Reshus ha'Rabim and his hand is in Reshus ha'Yachid) - we learn from the Oni in our Mishnah (when he sticks his hand in, the Ba'al ha'Bayis is exempt if he takes from it);

Likewise, we learn from the Ba'al ha'Bayis that a man's hand is not considered Reshus ha'Yachid (when he is in Reshus ha'Yachid and his hand is in Reshus ha'Rabim - the Oni is exempt if he takes from his hand in this case).

Question (Abaye): (Karmelis is a Reshus mid'Rabanan, it has the stringencies of Reshus ha'Yachid and Reshus ha'Rabim.) If a man's hand is in a different Reshus than he is, is his hand considered a Karmelis?

Did Chachamim [make it a Karmelis to] fine one who put his [laden] hand into a different Reshus, forbidding him to withdraw his hand (because he started to transgress, forcing him to leave it there until the end of Shabbos)?

Answer #1: Tana'im argue about this:

(Beraisa #1): If a man was holding fruit and put his hand outside, it is forbidden to return it.

(Beraisa #2): It is permitted to return it.

Suggestion: Tana #1 considers his hand to be Karmelis, Tana #2 does not.

Rejection #1: No, all consider his hand to be Karmelis;

In Beraisa #1, his hand is within 10 Tefachim of the ground, in Beraisa #2 it is above 10 Tefachim (Reshus ha'Rabim does not extend that high - since he did not start to transgress, there is no fine).

Rejection #2: All agree that his hand is not like a Karmelis, in both cases, his hand is below 10 Tefachim;

In Beraisa #2 he put out his hand before Shabbos, there is no fine; in Beraisa #1 he put out his hand on Shabbos, there is a fine.

Objection: Just the contrary! If he put out his hand before Shabbos, and drops the object [on Shabbos], he did not do a Melachah on Shabbos, Chachamim can fine him;

If he put out his hand on Shabbos, Chachamim should not fine him, lest he drop the object and transgress a Chiyuv Chatas! (If he realized while holding it that he may not drop it, he is exempt from Chatas; one is not Chayav Chatas unless he was Shogeg from the beginning until the end (4A)! Rather, Chachamim do not want to cause him to do an Isur [for which one who was totally Shogeg is Chayav] Chatas.)

Question: If we are not concerned for this, we should be able to resolve Rav Bivi bar Abaye's question!

Question (Rav Bivi bar Abaye): (Bread was normally baked by sticking dough to the wall of an oven, mid'Rabanan it is forbidden to peel it off the wall.) If Reuven stuck dough [on a wall] in an oven on Shabbos, may he remove it before it bakes, to avoid a Chiyuv Chatas?

If Chachamim are stringent and are not concerned lest he drop the fruit and complete Hotza'ah, they should not permit removing the dough before it finishes baking!

Answer #1: Indeed, we can resolve his question - we are not concerned, Reuven may not remove the dough.

Answer #2: We cannot resolve his question - Chachamim are stringent about Hotza'ah, for he (initially) transgressed b'Mezid, perhaps they are lenient about baking when his initial transgression was b'Shogeg.

Answer #3: Also the case of Hotza'ah was b'Shogeg - Tana #1 fines Shogeg on account of Mezid (lest one who was Mezid will say that he was Shogeg), Tana #2 does not.

Answer #4: Neither Tana fines Shogeg on account of Mezid - Beraisa #1 forbids throwing the fruit to another Chatzer, Beraisa #2 permits returning it to the original Chatzer.

This is like Rava's question.

Question (Rava): If a man was holding fruit and put his hand outside, may he return it to the same Chatzer?

Answer (Rav Nachman): It is permitted.

Question (Rava): May he throw them to another Chatzer?

Answer (Rav Nachman): It is forbidden.

Question (Rava): What is the difference between the cases?

Answer (Rav Nachman): In the first case, he does not accomplish his original goal (to move the fruit elsewhere), in the latter case he does.