Mesorat%20hashas for Keritot 29:53

ר' אליעזר מחייב על ולדי מלאכות במקום אבות מלאכות

we deal with a branch of a vine which was overhanging a fig-tree, and he cut off both [branches] at one time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With one movement he cut off the vine branch, which he needed for fuel, as well as a twig of the fig-tree, which he wanted for its fruit. The first act is a derivative, since it was not done for the sake of its fruit; the second is a principal act. R. Eliezer holds that he is liable to two offerin even though one action only was performed. The inference made above, that R. Eliezer would not declare him guilty twice if the same principal act of work was performed twice on separate occasions but under one spell of unawareness, is no longer logical, for in this instance two different actions were done.');">³²</span>

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Keritot 29:53. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.