Reply To: This Has Nothing to do With Techeiles PBA

DaasYochid:

Because while I hear your chiluk, it doesn’t make sense to me that it’s a chiluk in types of pircha. I could hear that there is a chiluk between a dayo on the halacha and a dayo on the situation (which is arbitrary but at least I can hear it conceptually). If it is in fact a din in the dayo, then there should never have been a question to begin with because this case would not be a problematic dayo. Unless you say that only R’ Tarfon holds of your chiluk. But that would be odd because ostensibly the chiluk (the way I’m saying it) is completely unrelated to whether the dayo is mafrich the kal vachomer which in essence would mean that there is a completely seperate machlokes between R’ Tarfon and the Rabanan which is never discussed.