(Beraisa [R. Meir]): 'Take out the Kelim you want outside, and bring in what you want inside, before this abominable one does and forbids you.'

Inference: If the Tzeduki will take out after they took out, he will not forbid them!

Question (Mishnah - R. Meir): If someone was Mevatel and later took something out, whether this was b'Shogeg or b'Mezid, he forbids.

Answer #1 (Rav Yosef): The Mishnah should say 'he does not forbid'.

Answer #2 (Abaye): He forbids [if he takes out] before others were Machazik in (took Kelim to or from) the Mavoy, but not after they were Machazik.

Support (Beraisa - R. Meir): If he took out before he gave Reshus, whether this was b'Shogeg or b'Mezid, he can be Mevatel;

R. Yehudah says, if he was Shogeg he can be Mevatel. If he was Mezid, he cannot be Mevatel (Tosfos - for he was Machazik in the Chatzer. Rashi - because it was forbidden to take out, he is a Mumar to [wantonly] be Mechalel Shabbos, so he is like a Nochri.)

R. Meir says, if he gave Reshus and then took out, whether this was b'Shogeg or b'Mezid, he forbids. (He retracted from his Bitul. We decree Shogeg due to Mezid);

R. Yehudah says, if he was Mezid he forbids. If he was Shogeg, he does not forbid.

This is only before others were Machazik. After they were Machazik, whether he was Shogeg or Mezid, he does not forbid.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): He said 'do your needs in the Mavoy before it gets dark and he will forbid you.''

Inference: This shows that [he considers] a Tzeduki to be like a Nochri. (Bitul does not help.)

Contradiction (Mishnah - R. Yehudah): He told them 'do your needs in the Mavoy [before Shabbos], before [he] will be Yotzi (take out) and forbid you.' (His Bitul helps until he takes out!)

Answer #1: He meant '...before the day will be Yotzei (end, and Shabbos will begin).

Answer #2: The Mishnah discusses a Tzeduki who is Mechalel Shabbos in private. The Beraisa discusses one who is Mechalel in public. (He is like a Nochri.)

Question: Who is the Tana of the following Beraisa?

(Beraisa): A Mumar or Giluy Panim (a brazen person) cannot be Mevatel Reshus.

Objection: Surely, a brazen person is not like a Mumar!

Correction: Rather, a Mumar b'Giluy Panim (he openly transgresses) cannot be Mevatel Reshus.

Answer: It is like R. Yehudah.

A certain man went out [on Shabbos] with a band of fragrances (alternatively - a ring with a stamp). When he saw R. Yehudah Nesi'ah, he covered it.

R. Yehudah Nesi'ah: This person can be Mevatel according to R. Yehudah [since he is ashamed for me to see that he is Mechalel Shabbos].

(Rav Huna): A Yisrael Mumar is one who is Mechalel Shabbos in public.

Question (Rav Nachman): Like which Tana is this?

It is not R. Meir. He holds that one who is suspected of transgressing any Mitzvah is suspected about all Mitzvos!

It is not Chachamim. They hold that one who is suspected of transgressing one Mitzvah is not suspected about other Mitzvos, unless he is a Mumar to serve idolatry!

Answer #1 (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): Rav Huna discusses who can give Reshus (Me'arev) and Mevatel Reshus:

(Beraisa): A Yisrael Mumar can be Mevatel Reshus only if he keeps Shabbos in public.

A Yisrael can be Mevatel. A Nochri cannot be Mevatel. He must rent his Reshus to permit carrying.

To be Mevatel, one says, 'my property is acquired to you' or 'it is Batel to you.' Chalipin (acquisition through a Kli such as a cloth) is not needed.

Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Rav Huna holds like Chachamim. He holds like the following Tana that Chilul Shabbos is as severe as idolatry, like the following Tana:

(Beraisa): "[If someone] Mikem [will offer an Olah]" - only some of you [may offer]. This excludes a Mumar;

"Mi'Kem" - I distinguish only among you (Yisrael), but not among other nations. (Any Nochri may offer an Olah.)

"Min ha'Behemah" includes people (i.e. Resha'im) who resemble animals;

This is the source that we accept Korbanos from sinners of Yisrael, to encourage them to repent.

The exceptions are a Mumar, one who is Menasech (pours libations to idolatry), and one who is Mechalel Shabbos in public. (We do not accept from them.)

Question: It says that "Mi'Kem" excludes a Mumar, and it says that we accept Korbanos from sinners of Yisrael!

Answer: The Reisha discusses a Mumar to the entire Torah. The middle clause discusses a Mumar to one Mitzvah.

Question (Seifa): The exceptions are a Mumar and one who is Menasech or Mechalel Shabbos in public.

Question: What kind of Mumar is this?

He is not a Mumar to the whole Torah. The Reisha taught this!

He is not a Mumar to one Mitzvah. The middle clause says that we accept from him!

Answer to both questions: Rather, the Seifa means that [we do not accept from] a Mumar who is Menasech or is Mechalel Shabbos in public.

Conclusion: The Tana equates idolatry and Chilul Shabbos.

(Mishnah): If one of the residents of a Chatzer forgot to give towards the Eruv, his house is forbidden [to transfer between it and the Chatzer] to him and to them (the Bnei Chatzer). Their houses are permitted to him and to them;

If they gave Reshus to him, he is permitted [to transfer between his house and the Chatzer], and they are forbidden [even from his house];

If two people forgot, they forbid each other;

This is because one person can give or receive Reshus. Two can give Reshus but cannot receive it.

Question: When may one give Reshus?

Answer #1 (Beis Shamai): One may give Reshus [only] before Shabbos;

Answer #2 (Beis Hillel): One may give Reshus [even] on Shabbos.

R. Meir says, if someone gave Reshus then took something out, whether this was b'Shogeg or b'Mezid, he forbids;

R. Yehudah says, if he was Mezid he forbids. If he was Shogeg, he does not forbid.

(Gemara) Inference: [In the Reisha] his house is forbidden, but his [share in the] Chatzer is permitted. (They may transfer between their houses and the Chatzer.)

Question: What is the case?

If he was Mevatel, his house should be permitted!

If he was not Mevatel, his Chatzer should be forbidden!

Answer: He was Mevatel his Chatzer, but not his house. This is like Chachamim [who argue with R. Eliezer]. One who is Mevatel his share in a Chatzer does not Mevatel his house, for one can live in a house without a Chatzer.

(Mishnah): Their houses are permitted to him and to them.

Question: What is the reason [that he is permitted? He was Mevatel!]

Answer: [After Bitul] he is like their guest.

(Mishnah): If they were Mevatel their Reshus to him, he is permitted and they are forbidden. (If they would use the Chatzer, it would look like they retract from their Bitul. R. Yehonason - even though one cannot retract after others were Machazik, it would look like they transgress.)

Question: We should say that they are like his guests!

Answer: One person can be the guest of several hosts [this is common], but we do not consider several people to be guests of one host. (If one is Mevatel to one, he is considered a guest; the guest may transfer between the host's house and the Chatzer - Ritva (64a Im Ken). Me'iri - he is not considered a guest.)

Suggestion: (This is a continuation of the Reisha, i.e. after he was Mevatel to them, they were Mevatel to him.) This shows that Bitul after Bitul works!

Rejection: No. It means that if [from the beginning] they were Mevatel their Reshus to him, he is permitted and they are forbidden.

(Mishnah): If two people forgot, they forbid each other.

Objection: This is obvious! (Any two partners in a Chatzer who were not Me'arev together forbid each other.)

Answer: The case is, [after everyone was Mevatel to them,] one of them was Mevatel to the other. One might have thought that the Bitul works;

The Mishnah teaches that this is not so, because the first Bitul did not permit these two people. (They did not acquire the Reshus.)

(Mishnah): This is because one person can give [or receive Reshus...]

Question: Why do we need this clause? The Mishnah already taught that one can give or receive Reshus!

Answer: It teaches that two can give Reshus.

Objection: Also this is obvious! (It already says, if they gave Reshus to him he is permitted...)

Answer: One might have thought that we decree to forbid this, lest people think that two people can receive Reshus. The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Mishnah): [Two people] cannot receive Reshus.

Question: Why do we need this clause? (It already says that two people forbid each other!)

Answer: It forbids even if others were Mevatel to one on condition that he will be Mevatel to the other.