Wednesday, November 01, 2006
4a Hachana derabbah
It seems there is a machlokes between rashi and tosfos in the understanding of hachana drabbah. Rashi both on 2b and 4a subsutitues the word hazmanah with hachana. Therefore when it comes to a beitza which is nolad on shabbos and the question is if you can eat it on the next day yom tov the reason why you can't is pasut to rashi because there was no hazmana beyom chol ( Hazmana, pshat is a active hazmana because achsevei lesudas shabbos). but tosfos 4a has to try to find a reason that in such a case you still have hachana on shabbos, if the beitza was negmar on chol.If he held of hazmana he would answer pashut like rashi.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
interesting point. i do see that tosafos implies that hachana is when something significant is done on shabbos to prepare this food for yom tov (that is why tosafos 2b also considers cooking from yom tov to shabbos a similar problem). whereas rashi seems to say that it is the fact that nothing was done on a chol to set this food aside for shabbos is really the problem.
this would explain another point as well. rashi clearly says that the hachana problem on 4a is also deoraysa, whereas in tosafos it is very possible that it is only a derabonon application of hachana d'raba. rashi holds that the problem of hachana is not being mazmin on a yom chol, so there is no difference if the egg finishes forming on shabbos or is layed on shabbos - both are missing setting aside from a weekday. whereas tosafos may hold that the forming of the egg from shabbos to yom tov is a significant process and therefore considered hachana on a torah level, but the laying of the egg is a less significant process and may only be a rabbinic application of the principle.
however, acc. to this approach in rashi, it would still need some explanation why an egg layed on a regular shabbos or regular yom tov would not be missing this type of hazmana and would not be assur midioraysa.
Based on your last point Avi I think the hagdara for Rashi is: The pasuk of vehecinu teach that you need to be mazmin on chol for shabbos but lack of hazmana does not assur. what assurs is when you are mechin on yom tov/shabbos for shabbos/yom tov then the thing that you were mechin becomes assur. therefore anytime there was hachano on shabbos/yom tov therr is a issur. but when all you have is a lack of hazmana ie. a betzia that was nold on shabbos there is no issur because there was no hacano done on shabbos/ yom tov for another day. I think this is midduyak in rashi on 4a d"h hachna
Post a Comment