Interesting opening for a standard Gemorah;

1) The opening with the prohibition of carrying from domain to domain seems
to cause the meforshim the need to find a "greater" reason. This is because
further
on in the Gemorah when the melachot will be listed, carrying will be among
the later
listed.

Ramabam mentions that since carrying is the most "intellectual" of the
melachot, that is a reason to start with it.

Meiri mentions that since the start of Shabbat could logically start
with transgression of this prohibition first, it is mentioned first. The
Gemorah itself will take this up on daf 11. Of course one could question
this, with a case where someone is already involved in another act...

2) Rambam points out that using the terms Bal HaBayit and Ahni is logical
because to have used the terms, "The man outside and the man inside would
have demanded adding explanation to keep it clear. An overriding rule of
Torah S'Bal Peh is to teach in the shortest manner. Due to the oral nature
no doubt.

I noticed that the Rif ignores all this opening Gemorah and only takes up
the line on the next daf. I was told once that since he is only interested
in the "halacha" he ignores all "fluff" such as digressions of logic and
limud.

Meiri also mentions a mussar note found in this mishna. The usage of the
terms Bal HaBayit and Ahni show that even though there is a mitzvah to give
to the poor, we don't ignore Shabbat. Of course the actual limud of not
building the Mishkan in the face of Shabbat would seem to be even stronger,
maybe this is the, "man in the street lesson."

At the Siyum that I went to, the Rav mentioned several reasons for
Shabbat being the first Mesechet in Moed. One was the issue of "Tadir and
Aino Tadir, Tadir kodem." Another was, "Kadosh and pachot Kodesh, Kodesh
kodem." The problem that I had with this one was Yuma, which deals with Yom
Kippur, which I thought was even more Kodesh that Shabbat. Well, I noticed
that the Meiri lists Shabbat as actually supposed to be after Pesachim,
although the reason he gives is listed in his opening hakdama to his whole
work, which I haven't gone through yet.

I like this mishna, it is very clean and efficient. Besides the already
mentioned Bal HaBayit and Ahni, we have very logical mechanisms for
introducing the concept of place and action. Both of which play a very
importatant role in the Laws of Shabbat. Place is the bephiphnim and bachutz
and action is pahshat yado.The concept of the hand as place will be dealt
with more in depth on the next blatt, as I mentioned.

The opening Gemorah is one of limud. That means that even though we are
interested in the halacha, the editors of the Gemorah were very careful to
give attention to the method that goes along with being able to learn Torah
S'Bal Peh. The fact that the issue of lists comes up elsewhere and that even
the way something is mentioned can change according to need is all about
understanding Conceptual ideas.

The second Sugiya, about the logical extensions of the statement in the
Gemorah is of the same order.

As the Chovot Halevavot mentions, the early Chachamim worked mostly with
set rules, as compared to our generation which deals mostly with set laws.
So, this mishna is fair game to their probing the reasons for its
statements...

Haven't done Tos yet, so mabye more later..