QUESTION: The Mishnah discusses the status of two Chatzeros, an inner one
and an outer one (see Insights to 66:2). In the Gemara, Rav Dimi says that
Rebbi Akiva in the Mishnah maintains that "Regel ha'Muteres bi'Mekomah
Oseres" (that is, the residents of the inner Chatzer -- even when they
made an Eruv among themselves and are permitted to carry in their own
Chatzer -- prohibit the residents of the outer Chatzer from carrying),
because the inner Chatzer tramples through (Derisas ha'Regel) the outer
Chatzer. The only way the residents of the outer Chatzer may carry is by
making one Eruv with the residents of the inner Chatzer.
Rav Dimi adds that the Chachamim hold that even "Regel *ha'Asurah*
bi'Mekomah Einah Oseres;" even when the residents of the inner Chatzer did
*not* make an Eruv and may not carry in their own Chatzer, their trampling
through the outer Chatzer does not prohibit the residents of the outer
Chatzer from carrying.
The Gemara disproves Rav Dimi by showing that the Chachamim in the Mishnah
do not go to either extreme; they do not hold that both "Regel ha'Asurah"
and "Regel ha'Muteres" prohibit the outer Chatzer (as Rebbi Akiva holds),
and they do not hold that *no* type of Derisas ha'Regel (even "Regel
ha'Muteres bi'Mekomah") prohibits the outer Chatzer (like the Chachamim
hold according to Rav Dimi). Therefore, Ravin concludes that there must be
three opinions -- the two opinions mentioned by Rav Dimi (the two
extremes), and the opinion of the Tana Kama of the Mishnah, who says that
only "Regel ha'Asurah" prohibits the outer Chatzer.
What forces Ravin to conclude that the Chachamim are a third opinion who
maintain that the inner Chatzer *never* prohibits the outer Chatzer, even
when the inner Chatzer is "Regel ha'Asurah bi'Mekomah?" The Gemara just
proved that there are *two* clear opinions in the Mishnah -- the opinion
of Rebbi Akiva, who holds that the inner Chatzer's Derisas ha'Regel
*always* prohibits the outer Chatzer, and the opinion of the Tana Kama,
who holds that they prohibit the outer Chatzer only when they are "Regel
ha'Asurah." We do not see in the Mishnah any opinion that holds that the
inner Chatzer *never* prohibits the outer Chatzer!
Why, then, did Ravin conclude that there are *three* opinions? He should
have simply said that Rav Dimi is incorrect and there are only two
opinions (the opinion of the Chachamim being that "Regel ha'Asurah"
prohibits the outer Chatzer and not "Regel ha'Muteres").
(a) The RASHBA and RITVA explain that since the Chachamim mentioned in the
Mishnah after Rebbi Akiva say "Ein Derisas ha'Regel Osrasah" -- "[the
inner Chatzer's] trampling does not prohibit [the outer Chatzer]," these
four words imply that there is no such thing as Derisas ha'Regel
prohibiting another Chatzer. It is from these words in the Mishnah that
Ravin and Rav Dimi inferred that one set of Chachamim hold that *no* type
of Derisas ha'Regel prohibits the outer Chatzer. This is a third opinion,
distinct from the Tana Kama and Rebbi Akiva.
(b) TOSFOS HA'ROSH explains that the Chachamim mentioned in the Mishnah
after Rebbi Akiva must hold that Derisas ha'Regel does not prohibit the
outer Chatzer for another reason. The Tana Kama of the Mishnah states that
only Regel ha'Asurah prohibits the outer Chatzer, but not Regel
ha'Muteres. After the Rebbi Akiva's opinion is stated in the Mishnah,
there is another statement of the Chachamim, saying that Derisas ha'Regel
does not prohibit the outer Chatzer. What are they adding to the Tana
Kama? It must be that they are saying that even Regel ha'Asurah does not
prohibit the outer Chatzer.