ONE IS NOT LIABLE WITHOUT HANACHAH (Yerushalmi Perek 1 Halachah 1 Daf 2a)

ר' יוסי בשם רבי יוחנן המוציא אינו חייב עד שיניח.


(R. Yosi citing R. Yochanan): One who is Motzi is not liable unless he did Hanachah (put the object to rest).

רבי יעקב בר אדא בשם ר' יוחנן עד שיטול ועד שיניח.


(R. Yakov bar Ada citing R. Yochanan): [He is not liable] unless he did took (did Akirah) and did Hanachah.

ר' זעירא בעי עד שיטול על מנת להניח. נטל לאכול ונמלך להניח לא הוה חייב.


Question (R. Ze'ira): Does he mean that he took with intent to do Hanachah? If so, if he took with intent to eat it, and reconsidered and did Hanachah, he would not be liable.

[דף ב עמוד ב] מה דמר ר' יוחנן דלא כר"י.


R. Yochanan's teaching us unlike R. Yosi;

דתני הוציא חצי גרוגרת והניחה וחזר והוציא חצי גרוגרת אם הניחה בתוך ד' אמות לראשונה חייב ואם לאו פטור.


(Beraisa): If one was Motzi a half-Grogeres and was Motzi another half-Grogeres, if he put it within four Amos of the first, he is liable. If not, he is exempt.

רי"א אם העבירו דרך עליה חייב ואם לאו פטור.


R. Yosi says, if he passed [the second half-Grogeres] over [the first, even though he did not rest it there], he is liable. If not, he is exempt.

ר"י עביד המהלך כמניח.


Inference: R. Yosi makes one who walks like one who does Hanachah (at every step. It is as if he did Hanachah where the first half-Grogeres rests. R. Yochanan requires true Hanachah.)

כמה דר"י עביד המהלך כמניח לחיוב כך הוא עביד המהלך כמניח לפטור. כיון שהוציאו נעשה כמו שהניחה שם. ויהא פטור


Question: Just like for Chiyuv, R. Yosi makes one who walks like one who does Hanachah, so to exempt he should makes one who walks like one who does Hanachah. Once he was Motzi it, it is as if he did Hanachah. He should be exempt! (How does it join with the first half-Grogeres?)

תיפתר שהיתה נתונה בתוך ארבע אמות.


Answer: The case is, [the first half-Grogeres] was within four Amos [of the opening to Reshus ha'Rabim. Even though we consider that there was Hanachah immediately, they join. We explained this like PNEI MOSHE.]

(כהדא) [צ"ל בהדא - שערי תורת ארץ ישראל, הגר"ח קניבסקי שליט"א] דתני ואם לאו פטור.


Question: About this, does [the Seifa say] "if not (he did not pass the second half-Grogeres over the first), he is exempt?! (He should be liable once he enters Reshus ha'Rabim, for it is within four Amos of the first half-Grogeres!)

אמר רבא בר בריה דרב פפי תיפתר שהיה הפתח רחב חמשה אמות והוציא אחת לכאן ואחת לכאן. והרי לא הוציא את השניה בתוך ד' אמות לראשונה


Answer (Rava bar brei d'Rav Papi): The case is, the opening was five Amos wide. He took one [half-Grogeres] out from this side [and rested it within four Amos of the opening], and [the other] one out from this side. He was not Motzi the second within four Amos of the first.

תמן תנינן רבי מאיר אומר אם היתה שבת והוציאו.


(Mishnah): (One can be liable four Chata'os and an Asham for one eating.) R. Meir says, if it was Shabbos and he was Motzi [the food in his mouth and swallowed it, he is liable a fifth Chatas];

אמרו לו אינו השם שזה חייב משום מהלך וזה חייב משום מניח.


They said [to R. Meir] this (liability for Shabbos) is different. This is due to walking, and he is liable only for Hanachah [when it rests in his stomach. The others, he is liable for eating, once he swallows! We explained this like CHASAM SOFER.]

מנו אמרו לו ר"י


Who are [the Chachamim] who said [so] to him? They are R. Yosi (who normally argues with R. Meir).

מחלפי שיטתיה דר"י תמן לא עביד המהלך כמניח. וכא עביד המהלך כמניח.


Question: R. Yosi contradicts himself! There, he does not consider one who walks like one who does Hanachah. Here, he considers one who walks like one who does Hanachah!

א"ר יודן תיפתר שהיה מוטל על האסקופה מקצתו בפנים ופיו לחוץ ופשט ידו ונטלה ואכלה. והרי לא הילך.


Answer (R. Yudan): The case is, [he did not eat while walking. Rather,] he was on the threshold, partially inside and his mouth was outside. He stretched his hand and took [the food from inside] and ate it. He did not walk (so this does not depend on whether or not walking is like Hanachah).