Question: According to those who explain the reason because Ein Bereirah, or due to Reishis [whose remnants are recognizable], since the Seifa teaches 'don't you admit, lest the flask break', what is the source that this is not their reason?

Answer: The Gemara knew that this is not the primary reason. Even though they did not consider this reason primary, they asked him to know what he would answer.

Support: We find like this in Zevachim (77b) regarding limbs of Tam animals that became mixed with limbs of blemished animals. R. Eliezer says, he offers, and I view the meat of the Ba'al Mum as if it is [burned on the Mizbe'ach not for the sake of a Korban, rather, like] wood;

This is not the primary reason, for regarding Nirva and Rove'a (an animal that had Bi'ah with a person) R. Eliezer agrees [that we do not offer it. If he views Pasul meat as if it is were wood, the law should be the same!]

The reason for a Ba'al Mum is because it is written "Mum Bam Lo Yeratzu", but through a mixture, Yeratzu (they are accepted);

R. Eliezer, who said "I view as if they are wood", asked Chachamim why they are not Machshir due to that reason, even though he himself was not concerned for that reason.

Remark: There are many cases like this in the Gemara.

Explanation: They do not totally admit to R. Eliezer, for according to R. Eliezer, he is like people of his city, and according to Rabanan, since they are in Safek, it is Chamar Gamal.

Question: Why do we need the reason of Hachanah? It should suffice that one may not acquire Shevisah on Shabbos, i.e. on Yom Tov, since on Yom Tov it is forbidden to leave the Techum!

This is like it says in Beitzah (17a) that we do not place Eruvei Techumim on Yom Tov for [the second day of] Yom Tov, even though there, the reason of Hachanah does not apply, for an egg laid on [Yom Tov Rishon] is permitted on [Yom Tov Sheni]!

Answer #1 (Ri): We need the reason of Hachanah due to the one who permits there to acquire Shevisah on Shabbos.

Answer #2: Because Rabanan asked R. Eliezer also from Eruvei Chatzeros, therefore he needed to answer due to Hachanah.

Support: Hachanah applies also to Eruvei Chatzeros, for Rav rules in our Sugya like R. Eliezer, that they are two Kedushos, and Rav himself rules in Beitzah (16b) like the first Tana, who says that when Yom Tov is after Shabbos, we are not Me'arev not Eruvei Techumim, and not Eruvei Chatzeros;

Since they are two Kedushos, why are we not Me'arev? You are forced to say that it is due to Hachanah.

Question: However, there Rebbi says that we are Me'arev Eruvei Chatzeros, but not Eruvei Techumim, and not Eruvei Chatzeros. What is the reason? Since he permits Eruvei Chatzeros, this connotes that he does not forbid Hachanah. If so, why are we not Me'arev Eruvei Techumim?

Answer #1: This is fine for the one who forbids to acquire Shevisah. However, for the one who permits, it is difficult!

Answer #2: Perhaps Rebbi and Rabanan argue about the following. Rebbi holds that the Isur of Hachanah does not apply to Eruvei Chatzeros, since on Yom Tov one may be Motzi from Chatzer to Chatzer.

Explanation: The Isur Hachanah is mid'Oraisa, like we learn below (38b) in our Sugya.

Implied question: Why may we bake on Yom Tov for Shabbos, via Eruvei Tavshilin?

Answer: Rabah explains in Pesachim (46b) that it is Ho'il (since) guests might come (perhaps the food will be used on Yom Tov).

Question: How could the Gemara want to say in Pesachim (46b) that R. Eliezer disagrees with Ho'il? If so, according to him, why may we bake on Yom Tov for Shabbos? In our Sugya, he holds that there is an Isur Hachanah!

Answer #1: The Sugya in Pesachim holds that one may not acquire Shevisah on Shabbos. Then, we do not need the reason of Hachanah, like I explained (in the previous Dibur);

The Sugya in Pesachim holds that R. Eliezer permits to make also Eruvei Chatzeros on Yom Tov for Shabbos, since he does not forbid Hachanah.

Question: Still, it is proven in Beitzah (4a) that R. Eliezer forbids Hachanah, regarding an egg laid on Shabbos, and R. Eliezer said that it is still an argument. Beis Shamai say that one may eat it on Yom Tov, and Beis Hillel forbid!

Answer: R. Eliezer holds like Beis Shamai, for he is Shemuti (from Beis Shamai).

Support: A Beraisa in Beitzah (4a) says that R. Eliezer says that one may eat it (the egg) and its mother.

Answer #2 (to Question (d) - Ritzva): Hachanah does not apply to baking and cooking, for they are merely fixing the food. Hachanah applies only to an egg and Eruv, which is a new matter.

Correction: R. Tam erased from his text "d'Tanya", for it says in Beitzah (2b) 'Rabah teaches like he taught elsewhere, for Rabah said "v'Hayah ba'Yom ha'Shishi v'Hechinu"...' If it is a Beraisa, why does it say "like he taught"?

Rebuttal: This is not difficult. It says "like he taught", for Rabah first brought the Beraisa to the Beis Midrash! (It was not known beforehand.)

Implied question: The Beraisa refutes R. Yochanan (Beitzah 4a), who does not forbid Hachanah!

Answer #1: Perhaps it was not taught in the academy of R. Chiya and R. Oshaya. (We do not challenge from such Beraisos, for they could be errant.)

Answer #2: Tana'im argue about this in Beitzah (3a).

Explanation (Rashi in Beitzah): Rabah teaches like he taught elsewhere, i.e. in Pesachim (47b) he holds that Muktzah is mid'Oraisa, from this verse.

Rebuttal: This is unreasonable. Also, Rabah retracted [from saying that Muktzah is mid'Oraisa].

Explanation: The verse connotes that "ba'Yom ha'Shishi [v'Hechinu]" - the manna fell [on Friday, i.e. a weekday, to prepare for Shabbos], and a Midrash expounds that manna did not fall for Yisrael on Shabbos or Yom Tov.

Observation: Some Midrashim argue. We expound "va'Yevarech va'Yekadesh" - Hash-m blessed Shabbos through manna (there was extra on Friday for the sake of Shabbos), and sanctified it through manna (it did not fall on Shabbos);

In "Atah Kidashta" (the middle Brachah of the Amidah on Shabbos night) "You blessed it more than all days, and sanctified it more than all Zemanim" connotes that it fell on Yom Tov.

Consequence: According to this, [to explain the Drashah] we must say that "ha'Shishi" connotes what is clarified, i.e. a weekday, like [we expound] "ha'Yarech' - the Meyumenes (special, i.e. right) thigh.

Question: It is proper for those in its Techum, just like we are Me'arev for a Yisrael with Terumah, since it is proper for Kohanim!

Answer: Just like we require that at night, i.e. the time that the Eruv takes effect, that he and his Eruv are in the Techum - if it rolled outside the Techum, it is not an Eruv...

Also here, we require that it is in his Techum during the day.

Question: It says "we require a meal that is proper during the day, and this is not fulfilled." This is astounding! This connotes that it would be fine if we did not require a meal that is proper during the day, even though he holds that an Eruv takes effect at the end of the day;

What is the reason? Since we are thinking that he placed one [Eruv] 2000 Amos in this direction, and [the other] 2000 Amos in [the other] direction, how does the Eruv take effect, and he acquires Shevisah, at the end of the day? At the end of the day he is still 4000 Amos from his Eruv!

Question: Why didn't [Abaye] ask against Rav Yehudah himself from his own teaching? You are forced to say that he forbids Hachanah, since he says (39a) that we are not Me'arev for the first time with bread;

Implied question: He said [here] that if one was Me'arev through his feet (went to his desired place of Shevisah) on Yom [Tov] Rishon, he is Me'arev through his feet on Yom [Tov] Sheni!

Answer: This that he said that he is Me'arev through his feet on Yom Sheni, the Beraisa above (38a-b) taught it, in which [Rebbi,] R. Yehudah, R. Shimon ben Gamliel [and R. Yishmael ben R. Yochanan ben Brokah] argue. (Maharam - Abaye did not know Rav Yehudah's teaching below.)

Implied question: Why was [the Beraisa] brought in the name of Rav Yehudah?

Answer: The Beraisa was not known to them. (Rav Yehudah taught and explained it, therefore it is attributed to him.)

Proof: It says below, about Rav Yehudah's teaching "[he is Me'arev] with the same bread." Why does Shmuel explain the words of Rav Yehudah, who was his Talmid?! Rather, surely Rav Yehudah taught the Beraisa.

Question: R. Yochanan ben Nuri said so only about one who slept outside the Techum, but if he is inside the Techum, he may go where people of the city may walk!

Answer: That is because Stam, he intends to be like people of that city. (Here, he wanted to make an Eruv.)