✦ ❖ ✦

DAAT · LEVEL 2 — LAMDAN

Shulchan Arukh · Orach Chayim — Siman 348, Lamdan level

Hilkhot Shabbat — in-depth study

סימן שמ״ח

דִּין הַמּוֹשִׁיט כְּלִי מֵרְשׁוּת לִרְשׁוּת

Reaching a hand from one domain into another: study, pilpul, the shitos of the Rishonim and the Acharonim

⚡ For lamdanim and talmidei chachamim ⚡

✦ ❖ ✦

In-depth pilpul

Talmudic sources, the underlying chakira,
the shitos of the Rishonim on one who reaches a hand from one domain into another

Subject:
Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayim, siman שמ״ח — a single seif
Commentaries actually anchored in this seif: מגן אברהם · משנה ברורה · באר הגולה · באר היטב

Mishnah Berurah: 10 ס״ק

Written and edited by:
Rav Yossef Haim Samama · DAAT

📑 Table of contents

Introducing the sugya — a person's hand in Shabbat 3
The underlying chakira — has the hand made a הנחה?
שוגג and מזיד — the penalty on one who reached out במזיד
Bringing the hand back to the same courtyard, or into another
He reached out מבעוד יום or משחשיכה — the machlokes of the יש אומרים
The fear that he may throw them down — a permission that averts a חיוב חטאת
He reached out into a כרמלית — the leniency in a rabbinic domain
The psak of the Beis Yosef and of the Shulchan Arukh
Practical consequences
Summary of the shitos and the line of the halakhah

📜 The text of the Shulchan Arukh — a single seif

סעיף א. דין המושיט מרשות לרשות. ובו סעיף אחד:
היה עומד ברשות היחיד והוצי' ידו מלאה פירות לרשות הרבים בתוך עשרה בשוגג מותר להחזירה לאותו חצר ואסור להושיטה לחצר אחר ואם במזיד אסור אפי' להחזירה לאותו חצר ויש אומרים דהני מילי כשהוציא' מבעוד יום אבל אם הוציאה משחשיכה מותר להחזירה שמא ישליכה מידו ויבא לידי חיוב חטאת במה דברים אמורים כשהוציאה לרשות הרבים אבל אם הוציאה לכרמלית בכל גוונא מותר להחזירה:

summary: he was standing in a רשות היחיד and reached his hand, full of fruit, out into the רשות הרבים, below ten tefachim. If he did so beshogeg, he may bring his hand back into the courtyard where he stands, and he may not reach it across into another courtyard; if he did so bemezid, he may not even bring it back into his own courtyard. There are those who say that this applies only where he reached out while it was still day; but if he reached out after nightfall he may bring his hand back, lest he throw the fruit from his hand and come to a חיוב חטאת. All this is said where he reached out into a רשות הרבים; but if he reached out into a כרמלית, he may bring his hand back in every case.

1. Introducing the sugya — a person's hand in Shabbat 3

The source in the Gemara

The source of the siman is in Shabbat (ג ע״א–ע״ב) — the sugya of ידו של אדם, "a person's hand": someone stood in a רשות היחיד and reached his hand, full of fruit, out into the רשות הרבים. The Gemara examines what his status is, and whether he may bring his hand back.

The underlying precision: the hand has been reached out into the רשות הרבים, but the object has not come to rest there — it is still in the hand. There is therefore no הנחה, and consequently no completed מלאכה. The question is not about חיוב but about the return: may he draw his hand back inside, or did the Sages penalize him?

2. The underlying chakira — has the hand made a הנחה?

Chakira: the hand of the one who reaches out — is it reckoned a מקום הנחה, a place where an object comes to rest?

First side: the hand is as though resting on the ground — the עקירה and the הנחה are therefore already complete, and the one who reached out is חייב. On this view, bringing the hand back would be a fresh הוצאה.
Second side: so long as the object is in the hand and the hand is in motion, there is no completed הנחה here — and the מלאכה remains suspended.

The conclusion of the sugya: so long as the hand has not come to rest, the מלאכה is not complete מן התורה. Accordingly, the permission or the prohibition to bring the hand back is not a דאורייתא din but a תקנת חכמים — a penalty on one side, the fear of a mishap on the other.

3. שוגג and מזיד — the penalty on one who reached out במזיד

The underlying distinction within the seif:

He reached out בשוגג — they did not penalize him; he may bring his hand back into the same courtyard. Although he performed an עקירה for the sake of an הוצאה, since he acted inadvertently he was not penalized.
He reached out במזיד — they penalized him; he may not even bring his hand back. So that a sinner should not profit, they forbade him even the return.

The Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק ב): although the one who reached out committed a transgression — an עקירה in the רשות היחיד for the sake of an הוצאה into the רשות הרבים — since he acted inadvertently, the Sages nonetheless did not penalize him.

4. Bringing the hand back to the same courtyard, or into another

יסוד: even בשוגג the permission is narrow — the seif writes: " מותר להחזירה לאותו חצר ואסור להושיטה לחצר אחר " (שו״ע או״ח שמ״ח).

Bringing the hand back into the courtyard where he stands undoes his act; reaching it across into another courtyard, on the contrary, carries out what he had in mind. The Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק ג) gives the reason for this limit: " כדי שלא יתקיים מחשבתו שחשב לפנותו משם ".

5. He reached out מבעוד יום or משחשיכה — the machlokes of the יש אומרים

The shitah of the יש אומרים: the whole rule of the penalty — the prohibition to bring the hand back where he acted במזיד — applies only where he reached out מבעוד יום. But if he reached out משחשיכה — he may bring his hand back even במזיד.

The reason: once night has fallen, if he is not allowed to bring his hand back he may throw the fruit from his hand and thereby make a הנחה, and come to a חיוב חטאת.
The foundation: better to permit the lighter prohibition — the return — in order to avert the graver one, a מלאכה דאורייתא.

The comparison is made with a question of Rav Bibi bar Abaye about dough stuck to the oven wall, and it must be read to the end: it is a בעיא, closing on “or did they not permit?”, and the sugya does not settle it — it proposes תִּפְשׁוֹט דְּלֹא הִתִּירוּ, then closes with a וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא, לְעוֹלָם לָא תִּפְשׁוֹט that distinguishes שוגג from מזיד.

" דְּבָעֵי רַב בִּיבִי בַּר אַבָּיֵי: הִדְבִּיק פַּת בַּתַּנּוּר, הִתִּירוּ לוֹ לִרְדּוֹתָהּ קוֹדֶם שֶׁיָּבֹא לִידֵי חִיּוּב חַטָּאת, אוֹ לֹא הִתִּירו " (שבת ג׳ ע״ב)

It is therefore not the Gemara but the Rishonim who draw the היתר from it — the Beit Yosef says so expressly, and with him the ground is not חיוב חטאת but איסור סקילה:

" ולמדו כן מדא״ר ביבי הדביק פת בתנור התירו לו לרדותה קודם שיבא לידי איסור סקילה " (בית יוסף או״ח שמ״ח)

6. The fear that he may throw them down — a permission that averts a חיוב חטאת

The fear the seif states — " שמא ישליכה מידו ויבא לידי חיוב חטאת " (שו״ע או״ח שמ״ח) — is the central lever of the shitah of the יש אומרים.

So long as the hand stays outstretched, the object has not come to rest and there is no חיוב; but should he tire and lower his hand, or throw the fruit, the הנחה would be complete. It is in the face of this risk of a mishap that the return was permitted, even to one who reached out במזיד.

The Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק ח) cautions, however, against taking that expression literally, since the seif is speaking here of a מזיד:

" האי לישנא לאו דוקא דהא במזיד מיירי "

What is to be feared, he explains, is that he may forget and throw the fruit down, and so come to an act that carries a חיוב חטאת for those who perform it inadvertently.

7. He reached out into a כרמלית — the leniency in a rabbinic domain

The closing clause of the seif — everything said about the penalty was said only of one who reaches his hand into the רשות הרבים. But if he reached it into a כרמלית — " בכל גוונא מותר להחזירה " (שו״ע או״ח שמ״ח), even במזיד. The reason: the כרמלית is itself only a rabbinic prohibition, and they were not stringent there as regards the penalty.

8. The psak of the Beis Yosef and of the Shulchan Arukh

Beis Yosef — he brings the sugya at the beginning of Shabbat (ג ע״ב) and the machlokes of the Rishonim about the return מבעוד יום and משחשיכה, and then rules in the Shulchan Arukh in a single seif that gathers every distinction: שוגג and מזיד, the same courtyard and another courtyard, מבעוד יום and משחשיכה (יש אומרים), and the רשות הרבים as against the כרמלית. The Rama adds no gloss here, and the Shulchan Arukh rules alone — which does not mean the matter is free of dispute: the Beis Yosef himself sets out the Rishonim on both sides, and the Mishnah Berurah (ס״ק י) reports that the גר״א, in his Biur, concludes stringently even in a כרמלית, as in a רשות הרבים.

9. Practical consequences

He reached out בשוגג into the רשות הרבים: he may bring his hand back into the same courtyard; he may not reach it across into another courtyard.
He reached out במזיד into the רשות הרבים, מבעוד יום: he may not even bring it back — that is the penalty.
He reached out משחשיכה: according to the יש אומרים — he may bring his hand back even במזיד, lest he throw the fruit down.
Above ten tefachim: that is a מקום פטור — he may bring his hand back in any case.
He reached out into a כרמלית: he may bring his hand back in every case.

10. Summary of the shitos and the line of the halakhah

The יסוד: a hand reached out from the רשות היחיד into the רשות הרבים — there is no הנחה, hence no completed מלאכה; the whole question is that of the return:

שוגג — he may bring his hand back into the same courtyard, not into another.
מזיד מבעוד יום — he may not even bring it back: that is a penalty.
משחשיכה — the יש אומרים permit him to bring it back even במזיד, lest he throw the fruit down.
כרמלית — he may bring his hand back in every case.

For practical conduct — according to the custom of one's community and the ruling of a Rav.

Going deeper

Level 3 — Synthesis: a structured recap, with memory markers, decision trees and rules of thumb.
Level 4 — Daat HaRav: the shitah of the Admur HaZaken (Shulchan Arukh HaRav).

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DAAT · Rav Yossef Haim Samama

Siman 348 · Level 2 — Lamdan
♥ Support DAAT

📖Join a chavrusa