HOW TO EXPLAIN THE MISHNAH
Answer #2 (Beraisa - Rebbi): If one threw something from Reshus ha'Rabim to Reshus ha'Rabim and it passed through Reshus ha'Yachid, he is liable;
(Rav Yehudah): Rebbi is Mechayev two Chata'os (if he was Shogeg), one for Hotza'ah and one for Hachnasah
(Surely, this is because Kelutah k'Mi she'Hunchah -) - this shows that he does not require Akirah or Hanachah to be from (or on) a place four by four!
Rejection: No - Rav and Shmuel explained, Rebbi is Mechayev only in a Reshus ha'Yachid with a ceiling over it, he considers it to be filled (with articles, therefore it is as if the thrown object rests on something), but he exempts if there is no ceiling.
Suggestion: Perhaps [in our Mishnah] a ceiling covers [the Oni and Ba'al ha'Bayis]!
Rejection: That would explain Akirah and Hanachah in Reshus ha'Yachid, but one would not be liable for transferring to or from such a Reshus ha'Rabim!
(Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah): One who carries four Amos in a Reshus ha'Rabim with a ceiling is exempt, for this is not like Machane Yisrael in the Midbar.
(Rav Yosef (Answer #2, 4B 2:g) is rejected.)
Answer #3 (to Question 2:b, 4B - R. Zeira): Our Mishnah is like Others.
(Beraisa - Others): If Reuven threw something and Shimon stood still and caught it (in a different Reshus or at least four Amos away in Reshus ha'Rabim), Reuven is liable;
If Shimon moved and caught it, Reuven is exempt.
This shows that Others do not require Hanachah on a place four by four!
Rejection #1: Perhaps Others do not require four by four for Hanachah, but they require it for Akirah!
Rejection #2: Perhaps Others require four by four even for Hanachah - the case is, Shimon spread a [four by four] garment to catch it.
Answer #4 (to Question 2:b, 4B - R. Aba): The case (in our Mishnah) is, the object was put in on a basket that is four by four.
Question: But the Mishnah says that he put it in the other's hand!
Answer: It means, he put it in a basket in the other's hand.
Question: This explains Hanachah in Reshus ha'Yachid, but in Reshus ha'Rabim, such a basket is a Reshus ha'Yachid (so why is the Ba'al ha'Bayis Chayav for Hotza'ah?)!
Suggestion: Our Mishnah is unlike R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah.
(Beraisa - R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah): If one inserted a pole in Reshus ha'Rabim with a basket (four by four) on top, and one threw something (from Reshus ha'Rabim) and it landed on the basket, he is liable.
According to R. Yosi, such a basket is Reshus ha'Yachid, the Ba'al ha'Bayis cannot be Chayav for Hotza'ah!
Answer: Our Mishnah can be even like R. Yosi;
He considers the basket to be Reshus ha'Yachid only if [the top of] it is above 10 Tefachim - in the Mishnah, it is below 10 (and is Batul to Reshus ha'Rabim).
Objection (to Answers (j) and (h) - R. Avahu): The Mishnah does not say that he put it in a basket, rather, in the other's hand!
Answer #5 (R. Avahu): The case is, the receiving hand was within three Tefachim of the ground (therefore it is Batul to the ground and is considered to be four by four.)
Question: The Mishnah says that the Oni is standing outside (surely, his hand is above three!)
Answers: The case is, he is bending down; alternatively, he is standing in a pit; alternatively, he is a midget.
Objection (Rava): Did the Tana teach Hotza'ah only in such unusual cases?!
Answer #6 (Rava, and Ravin citing R. Yochanan): A person's hand is considered to be four by four.
CATCHING IN THE HAND
(R. Avin citing R. Yochanan): If Reuven threw something and it landed in Shimon's hand, Reuven is liable.
Question: What is the Chidush?
The Chidush cannot be that a person's hand is considered to be four by four, for R. Yochanan explicitly taught this (he would not teach it again in different words!)
Answer: Indeed, that is the Chidush;
One might have thought, a hand is like four by four only when a person specifically intended [to put something in the hand] - here, R. Yochanan teaches that even if he did not care where it lands, the hand is considered four by four.
(R. Avin citing R. Yochanan): If Shimon stood still and caught it, Reuven is liable; if Shimon moved and caught it, Reuven is exempt.
Support (Beraisa - Others): If Shimon stood still and caught it, Reuven is liable; if Shimon moved and caught it, Reuven is exempt.
Question (R. Yochanan): If Reuven threw an object and ran to catch it, what is the law?
Question: What is R. Yochanan unsure about?
Answer (Rav Ada bar Ahavah): He asks about one person who did two distinct actions (that together comprise a Melachah):
Version #1 (Rashi): If we consider him like one person, he is liable; if we consider him like two, he is exempt [like two who did a Melachah together].
Version #2 (R. Chananel): If we consider him like two, he is liable; if we consider him like one, he is exempt (it is as if the Akirah and Hanachah are in the same place). (end of Version #2)
This question is not resolved.
IS WATER NACH?
(R. Avin citing R. Yochanan): If Shimon put his hand into Reuven's Chatzer (Reshus ha'Yachid), received [falling] rainwater and withdrew his hand (to Reshus ha'Rabim), he is liable.
Question (R. Zeira): Surely, it makes no difference whether someone else fills Shimon's hand or if Shamayim (falling rain) does - he did not do Akirah, he is exempt!
Answer #1: R. Avin means, he gathered rainwater (he hit falling rain, diverting it, and caught it with his other hand).
Question: If so, Akirah was not from a place that is four by four, he should be exempt!
Answer (R. Chiya brei d'Rav Huna): He gathered rainwater from on top of a wall.
Question: Such water is not considered to be Nach (at rest, for it would have run off the wall!)
Answer: The case is, the wall is slanted - this is like Rava said elsewhere:
(Mishnah): If Reuven was reading a Sefer [of rolled up parchment] on a porch (a Karmelis) and it became unraveled (and the other end fell to Reshus ha'Rabim), he may roll it back to himself;
If he was on the roof (Reshus ha'Yachid) and it became unraveled:
Before the end comes within 10 Tefachim of the ground, he may roll it back;
Once the end is within 10 Tefachim, he [may not roll it back, this is a decree lest he grab it when it fell totally from his hand, he would be Chayav for this; rather, he) should turn it over so the writing is not seen (lest Kisvei ha'Kodesh be disgraced.)
Question: Why is there a decree? Even if it fell from his hand, he would not be Chayav for retrieving it, for it is not Nach!
Answer (Rava): The case is, the wall is slanted (and we decree, lest it rest on the wall.)
Rejection: Rava considers a Sefer on a slanted wall to be Nach, but he would not say so about water, for it runs off!
Answer #2 (Rava): The case is, he took water from a ditch.
Objection: If so, obviously he is liable, what is the Chidush?
Answer: (He only took some of the water, i.e. on top -) one might have thought that it is not considered to be Nach (for water constantly mixes) - Rava teaches, this is not so.
Rava's answer is like the reasoning behind a question he asked.
Question (Rava): If a nut is in a vessel floating on water:
Do we focus on the nut in the vessel, and consider it Munach (at rest?)
Or, do we focus on the vessel in the water, and say that it is not Munach, for it moves [through the water]?
This question is not resolved.
R. Yochanan ben Nuri and Chachamim argue about oil floating on top of wine:
(Mishnah): If (Terumah) oil is floating on top of (Terumah) wine and a Tevul Yom touched the oil, only the oil is Nifsal (for it is not considered connected to the wine);
R. Yochanan ben Nuri says, they are connected (both are Nifsalim).
ONE IS NOT LIABLE UNTIL HE STOPS
(R. Avin citing R. Yochanan): If Reuven was laden with food and drink, and went back and forth between Reshus ha'Rabim and Reshus ha'Yachid all day, he is exempt until he stops.
(Abaye): He is not liable until he stops to rest. (If he stops to adjust the load, this is not considered Hanachah, he is exempt.)
Question: What is Abaye's source to say this?
Answer: Rabah taught, if one carried four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim, but stopped in the middle to rest, he is exempt (this is Hanachah, it ends his Ha'avarah (transport) before he did a Shi'ur to be Chayav);
If he stopped to adjust, he is liable (when he finishes);
If after four Amos he stopped to rest, he is liable; if he stopped to adjust, he is exempt.
Question: R. Yochanan taught the same Chidush (as (a)) in different words!
(Rav Safra citing R. Yochanan): If one moved objects from one corner to another, and reconsidered to take them out, he is exempt, since his initial intention was not to take them out.
Answer: Amora'im argue about which of these R. Yochanan really said.
(Beraisa): If one was Motzi from a store (Reshus ha'Yachid) to the market (a Reshus ha'Rabim) via a Stav (a place of platforms where merchants sit, it is a Karmelis), he is liable;
Ben Azai exempts.