Sunday Matinee Shiur in a Nutshell

The new sugyah at the bottom of ח., that we began in our Sunday Matinee shiur - deals with the din of Abba Shaul in the mishna: Abba Shaul states the following: Just as יער is רשות, so too, all רשות, to exclude a case of a father who hits a son (and G-d forbid, kills him) a rebbe who hits a student, and a שליח ב"ד (Rashi: while delivering 40 lashes required by the halacha).  These three scenarios are cases in which the force is being exerted in the context of a mitzvah (father and rebbe - education; Shaliach B"D - halachic punishment in court) and the Torah never intended to legislate the laws of עיר מקלט in such cases.

The ההוא מרבנן - a student in the yeshiva asked Rava: how do we (ie how does Abba Shaul) know that the Torah is speaking about a non-mitzvah woodchopper case? Maybe the Torah is speaking about the cutting of trees for the מזבח or for a Succah - and still the Torah says that one who does so and, in that context, unintentionally kills, should go to Galut?

We explained that the effect of this קושיא, were it to be successful, would be to torpedo the three exceptions of Abba Shaul - thus sending a father, rebbe, and Shaliach Bet Din to the Galut of an עיר מקלט!


Rava's answer back to the student is:
If you found trees already cut, there would be no mitzvah to cut them again to prepare them for the מזבח or for a Succah.  Unlike other areas of halacha, where a component of a mitzvah (matzah, tefillin etc) is to form the object לשמה - for the sake of the mitzvah - in order for it to be kosher, there is no such precondition with the wood of the altar or a Succah.
If so, Rava reasons, there is no intrinsic mitzvah to cut the wood even if you had to do so from scratch. 


How does this answer the student's question?
We explained: All wood cutting - including Succah and altar woodcutting is in the halachic realm of רשות ie non-mitzvah.  The יער case of the Torah is the paradigm for non-mitzvah activities resulting in death - triggering Galut.  This therefore explains Abba Shaul's drasha - that the rebbe, parent, or Shaliach BD, would be exempt from Galut since they are involved in mitzvot.

Tonight, we will deal with the איתיביה of Ravina on Rava - in which Ravina introduces our mishna to disprove Rava's response to the talmid.  Should Ravina's contradiction stand, Rava's answer would fall, the talmid's קושיא would be reinstated, and Abba Shaul's drasha would be in question.

See you in shiur!