רמב''ם הלכות שגגות פרק ז' שייך למסכת שבת פרק הכלל גדולה יש שאלה על רמב''ם. נראה שהוא אומר שאם אחד שוכח את כל הל''ט אבות מלאכתם ועונשן אז הוא מביא ל''ט חטאות
ואז באיזה אופן שהוא זוכר שבת ? בנו של רמב''ם, אברהם, אמר שיש לך לומר רמב''ם אומר גם שוכח ל''ט אבות מלאכה או ועונשן, אבל לא את שניהם וכולם ביחד. או שהוא שכח את התולדות. בגמרא מובא שר 'יוחנן אמר שגגת עונש שמה שגגה. ריש לקיש אמר שגגת עונש שמה מזיד. הגמרא שאלה על המשנה. למה זה לציין ל''ט? כולנו יכולים לספור. הוא עונה לומר לנו הוא מביא ל''ט אם הוא שכח את כל. ואז זה אומר שזה טוב לר 'יוחנן, אבל מה לגבי לריש לקיש? באיזה אופן שהוא זוכר שבת בכלל? הגמרא עונה ריש לקיש אמר תחום שבת ואליבא דר' עקיבא. הזכרתי את יד על הבעיה ברמב''ם לשותף הלמידה שלי. הוא אמר שאין בעיה ברמב''ם כי זה קל וחומר. אני לא יכול להבין למה הוא מתכוון. אני חושב מה שהוא אומר זה שהקבוצה של כל הדברים שמחויבים בחטאות לר 'יוחנן היא הרבה יותר גדולה מן הקבוצה של ריש לקיש. למעשה זה כולל כל דבר בקבוצה של ריש לקיש ואז כפליים. אז אם משהו הוא בקבוצה לריש לקיש, אז קל וחומר לר 'יוחנן, ועל ידי הגדרה גם לרמב''ם. אבל אם זה מה שהוא התכוון יש לי שאלה. לי זה נראה שהחץ הולך בכיוון ההפוך. לריש לקיש קצת ידע נחשב הרבה. הידיעה של עונש מספיק כדי לגרום לו מזיד. אותו ידע לר 'יוחנן נחשב קטן. אז כמה כמות קטנה של ידע לריש לקיש, לר 'יוחנן יכול להיות שלא מספיק כדי לגרום לו להיחשב כלזכור שבת בכלל
From what I remember in Shabat there is question on the Rambam. He seems to be saying if one forgets all 39 kinds of work and their punishment then he bring 39 sin offerings [a female goat or a female sheep].
Then in what way did he remember Shabbat?
I think the son of the Rambam, Avraham said that you have to say the Rambam means either forgetting the 39 kinds of work or their punishment but not both and all together. Or he forgot the branches.
From what I remember in the Talmud the discussion is this. R. Yochanan says forgetting the punishment is also considered שוגג. Reish Lakish said that is called on purpose.
I think the Gemara asked on the Mishna. Why does it specify the number 39? We can all count. It answers to tell us one is liable 39 offerings if he forgot all. And then it says that is good to Rabbi Yochanan but what about to Reish Lakish? In what way did he remember Shabbat at all? And I think the Gemara answers Reish Lakish would say he remembered the Shabbat boundary like R. Akiva.
I mentioned off hand the problem about the Rambam to my learning partner.
He said, "There is no problem on the Rambam because it is a an a fortiori."
I can't figure out what he meant. I think what he means is that the set of all things that are obligated in a sin offering to R Yochanan is much larger that the set of Reish Lakish. In fact, it includes everything in the set of Reish Lakish, and then twice as much. So if something is in the set to Reish Lakish, then a fortiori to R. Yochanan, and by definition then also to the Rambam.
But if this is what he meant I have a question. To me it seems that the arrow goes the opposite way. To RL a little knowledge is considered a lot. Knowing the punishment is enough to make him מזיד (on purpose). That same knowledge to R Yochanan is considered small. So some small amount of knowledge to RL, R Yochanan might very well consider to be not enough to make him be considered as remembering Shabbat at all.
Appendix:
I should have mentioned that to bring a sin offering, one needs a little knowledge.
If he did not know anything about Shabbat at all then he brings only one sacrifice for all the work and all the shabatot. [To Munbaz even one he does not bring]
Then in what way did he remember Shabbat?
I think the son of the Rambam, Avraham said that you have to say the Rambam means either forgetting the 39 kinds of work or their punishment but not both and all together. Or he forgot the branches.
From what I remember in the Talmud the discussion is this. R. Yochanan says forgetting the punishment is also considered שוגג. Reish Lakish said that is called on purpose.
I think the Gemara asked on the Mishna. Why does it specify the number 39? We can all count. It answers to tell us one is liable 39 offerings if he forgot all. And then it says that is good to Rabbi Yochanan but what about to Reish Lakish? In what way did he remember Shabbat at all? And I think the Gemara answers Reish Lakish would say he remembered the Shabbat boundary like R. Akiva.
I mentioned off hand the problem about the Rambam to my learning partner.
He said, "There is no problem on the Rambam because it is a an a fortiori."
I can't figure out what he meant. I think what he means is that the set of all things that are obligated in a sin offering to R Yochanan is much larger that the set of Reish Lakish. In fact, it includes everything in the set of Reish Lakish, and then twice as much. So if something is in the set to Reish Lakish, then a fortiori to R. Yochanan, and by definition then also to the Rambam.
But if this is what he meant I have a question. To me it seems that the arrow goes the opposite way. To RL a little knowledge is considered a lot. Knowing the punishment is enough to make him מזיד (on purpose). That same knowledge to R Yochanan is considered small. So some small amount of knowledge to RL, R Yochanan might very well consider to be not enough to make him be considered as remembering Shabbat at all.
Appendix:
I should have mentioned that to bring a sin offering, one needs a little knowledge.
If he did not know anything about Shabbat at all then he brings only one sacrifice for all the work and all the shabatot. [To Munbaz even one he does not bring]
