Shabbat 3B

אמר ליה רבי חייא לרב: בר פחתי! לא אמינא לך, כי קאי רבי בהא מסכתא לא תשייליה במסכתא אחריתי, דילמא לאו אדעתיה. דאי לאו דרבי גברא רבה הוא ⁠— כספתיה, דמשני לך שינויא דלאו שינויא הוא.

R' Ḥiyya said to Rav, his sister’s son: Son of great men, didn’t I tell you that when R' Yehuda HaNasi is involved in this tractate do not ask him questions in another tractate, as perhaps it will not be on his mind and he will be unable to answer? The dilemma that Rav asked was not related to the subject matter of the tractate which they were studying. As, had it not been for the fact that R' Yehuda HaNasi is a great man, you would have shamed him, as he would have been forced to give you an answer that is not an appropriate answer.

השתא מיהת שפיר משני לך. דתניא: היה טעון אוכלין ומשקין מבעוד יום, והוציאן לחוץ משחשיכה ⁠— חייב, לפי שאינו דומה לידו.

Now, he was involved in another tractate. Nevertheless, he answered you well, as it was taught in a baraita: One who was laden with food and drink while it was still day, before Shabbat began, and, consequently, did not perform the act of lifting on Shabbat, and he carried them out into the public domain after dark on Shabbat is liable. Since, as a rule, his body is fixed in one place, moving it is considered like lifting an object, and he is liable. It is not similar to lifting his hand and moving it from place to place. Since his hand is not fixed in one place, moving it is not considered lifting.

אמר אביי: פשיטא לי ידו של אדם אינה לא כרשות הרבים ולא כרשות היחיד. כרשות הרבים לא דמיא ⁠— מידו דעני. כרשות היחיד לא דמיא ⁠— מידו דבעל הבית.

Abaye said: It is obvious to me that the hand of a person in and of itself, when he moves it out of the domain where he is located, is considered to be neither like the public domain nor like the private domain, even if it is the hand of someone standing in one of those domains. Proof that the hand is not considered like the public domain can be derived from the ruling of the Mishnah with regard to the hand of the poor person. As we learned with regard to the poor person who brought his hand carrying an object that he lifted from the public domain into the private domain and the homeowner took the object from his hand; the homeowner is not liable. Apparently, the hand of the poor person is not considered part of the public domain, even though he himself is located in the public domain. Proof that it is not considered like the private domain can be derived from the ruling of the Mishnah with regard to the hand of the homeowner. As we learned with regard to the homeowner who moved his hand carrying an object that he lifted from the private domain into the public domain and the poor person took the object from his hand; the poor person is not liable for carrying out from a private domain.