[Avodah] chagiga 23a

[Rich, Joel via Avodah]

I was wondering about the gemara in chagiga 23a where the opinion of r'chanania ben akiva is stated that when the chachamim made a gzeira based on an incident, it was limited to the specifics of the incident(per rashi there). It sounds like his opinion is the chachamim would make a gzeira based on a single incident and limit it to that circumstance and I was wondering what the underlying philosophy might be (e.g. God made the incident happen so we would legislate on it or perhaps the chachamim wanted to make note of the occurrence). All this must tie in with general gzeirah/takana rules(unless the algorithm is multivariate which is my suspicion) with not making a takana in highly unusual cases, ones the tzibbur can't keep....
Gmar Chatimah Tova
Joel Rich

THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE
ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is
strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141002/fbcdd78a/attachment.htm>

[Micha Berger via Avodah]

I am still a little bewildered by the gezera to eliminate shofar (and
lulav, megilla) on shabbat because some one might carry outside an eruv.
Does that mean anytime there is room for error we should outlaw the
procedure?

I think this is answered by R' Joel Rich's post of 11:54am EDT today:
: I was wondering about the gemara in chagiga 23a where the opinion of
: r'chanania ben akiva is stated that when the chachamim made a gzeira
: based on an incident, it was limited to the specifics of the incident(per
: rashi there)...

I think we proved that a gezeira must come from a risk that actually
caused a problem, and (less conclusively proven but seems only logical)
the risk (probability times possible loss) is great enough to justify
it.

GCT!
-Micha