1)DEPOSITS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN STOLEN (cont.)
(a)(Continuation of Beraisa): If he took a deposit from a child, he sells it and buys a Segulah (something that yields fruits and the principal remains intact, like we will explain);
1.If the child dies, he gives the Segulah to the child's heirs.
(b)If the woman, slave or child said just before dying 'it belongs to Ploni', we give it to Ploni;
1.If Reuven does not believe this, he gives it to the husband, owner or father.
(c)When the wife of Rabah bar bar Chanah died, she said 'these rings belong to Marsa and his grandsons.'
(d)Version #1 - Rav (to Rabah bar bar Chanah): If you believe her, do like she said. If not, keep them for yourself.
(e)Version #2 - Rav: If you think that Marsa and his grandsons are wealthy enough to deposit such rings with your wife (alternatively, if you think that your wife had friends who would give her such rings for a gift (on condition that you have no rights to them), do like she said. If not, keep them for yourself. (end of Version #2)
(f)(Beraisa): If one took a deposit from a child, he sells it and buys a Segulah.
(g)Question: What is a Segulah?
(h)Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): It is a Sefer Torah. (One may sell it only to get married.)
(i)Answer #2 (Rabah bar Rav Huna): It is a date tree from which he eats dates.
2)CHAZAKAH IN PROPERTY OF RELATIVES
(a)(Mishnah): A father does not get a Chazakah in his son's property, nor vice-versa.
(b)(Rav Yosef): This applies even if the son is independent of his father (for one would not protest if the other used his property).
(c)(Rava): If the son is independent of his father, they can get a Chazakah against each other.
(d)(R. Yirmeyah mi'Difti): A case occurred, and Rav Papi ruled like Rava.
(e)(Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): I heard that Rav Nachman held like Rava.
(f)The Halachah follows Rava.
(g)Support (Beraisa): If a son was independent of his father, or a woman was divorced, he or she can get a Chazakah in the property of his or her father or ex-husband, like a stranger.
3)A BROTHER WHO RAN THE ESTATE
(a)Yakov died, and Reuven (one of the orphans) used to buy and sell property of the estate on behalf of all the brothers. There were documents saying that he bought property or lent money. He claims that they belong to him himself, from money he inherited from his mother's father.
(b)(Rav): He must bring proof. (If not, we assume that the property or loans belong to all the brothers.)
(c)(Shmuel): His brothers must bring proof (if not, he is believed).
1.(Shmuel): Rav admits that after Reuven dies, his brothers must bring proof.
2.Question (Rav Papa): Do we claim on behalf of Reuven's orphans something that he himself could not claim (that the brothers must bring proof)?!
i.Rava took combers' scissors and a Sefer of Agadata from orphans (of Ploni), for these are things that are normally lent or rented;
ii.(Rav Huna bar Avin): If something is normally lent or rented (and it is known that it previously belonged to someone else), one is not believed to say that he bought it. (Since Ploni would not have been believed to say 'I bought it', we do not make this claim on behalf of his orphans.)
3.This is left difficult.
(d)(Rav Chisda): Rav's law applies only when the brothers share everything, but if they prepare their food separately, we assume that Reuven acquired money by eating less.
(e)Question: What kind of proof must Reuven bring?
(f)Answer #1 (Rabah): He must bring witnesses.
(g)Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes): The document must be validated (this shows that Beis Din verified that it is Reuven's property).
(h)Rava (to Rav Nachman): Like whom do you hold?
(i)Rav Nachman: I hold like the Beraisa.
1.(Beraisa): If Reuven used to buy and sell on behalf of all the brothers, and documents said that he bought property or lent money; and he claims that they belong to him himself, from money he inherited from his mother's father, he must bring proof.
2.Similarly, if a widow used to buy and sell on behalf of the orphans, and documents said that she bought property or lent money; and she claims that they belong to her, from money she inherited from her grandfather, she must bring proof.
3.Question: What is the Chidush regarding the widow?
4.Answer: One might have thought that since a widow who toils on behalf of orphans is respected, she is unlikely to falsely claim their money, and she should be believed. The Beraisa teaches that this is not so. (She feels she is entitled to compensation for her toil, and rationalizes claiming their property for herself.)
4)CHAZAKAH TO ACQUIRE
(a)(Mishnah): This refers to Chazakah, but if one gives a gift, or brothers that divide an inheritance ...
(b)Question: Are the latter cases not Chazakah?!
(c)Answer: The Mishnah is abbreviated. It means as follows: three years are needed for Chazakah that is a proof of ownership (for one who lost his document), but regarding a gift, division of inheritance, or Kinyan of Hefker property, when only a Kinyan is needed (not a proof), locking the fence, fencing or breaching any amount in a wall is a Chazakah.
(d)(R. Hoshaya): Locking the fence, fencing or breaching any amount in a wall in front of the original owner is a Chazakah.
(e)Question: This implies that if it is not in front of the owner, it is not a Chazakah!
(f)Answer (Rava): He means, if it is in front of the owner, the owner need not say 'go make a Chazakah and acquire.' If it is not in front of the owner, the owner must say 'go make a Chazakah and acquire'.