Reply To: This Has Nothing to do With Techeiles PBA

Actually come to think of it, if you don’t hold of dayo in this type of kal vachomer, you have entirely undermined the whole concept of kal vachomer. Because it’s not a kal and a chamur here – learning one halacha is not more chamur than learning two halachos so there’s no kal vachomer in the first place. If anything it’s the exact opposite of a kal vachomer. Forget dayo. So if you say that R’ Tarfon holds that it’s ok to make a kal vachomer from two halachos to one halacha since otherwise you wouldn’t be able to make this kal vachomer, you can then make any kal vachomer from something more chamur to something more kal with the excuse that otherwise there would be no kal vachomer in this case. That doesn’t make any sense.