1)

(a)Our Mishnah now discusses a case where a house fell on Reuven and his father Ya'akov, or on Reuven and on his Morishin. Who is meant by 'his Morishin'?

(b)What is now the bone of contention between Reuven's heirs and his father's wife or creditor?

(c)What do Beis Hillel mean when they say 'Nechasim be'Chezkasan'?

(d)Based on which principle do Beis Shamai then say 'Yachloku'?

1)

(a)Our Mishnah now discusses a case where a house fell on Reuven and his father Ya'akov, or on Reuven and his Morishin his next of kin other than his father (e.g. his paternal uncle, or his brothers).

(b)The bone of contention between Ya'akov's heirs and Reuven's wife or creditor (based on the fact that Reuven left nothing of his own) is who died first; Reuven (in which case, the father's heirs inherit everything, and Reuven's creditors have no claim); or Ya'akov (in which case, the deceased Reuven too, inherits part of Ya'akov's property, to which they now have rights).

(c)When Beis Hillel say 'Nechasim be'Chezkasan' they mean in the Chazakah of the father's heirs, who are considered heirs either way (and not to Reuven's creditors, who only inherit in the event that Ya'akov died first (and we have a principle 'Ein Safek Motzi Miyedei Vadai').

(d)Beis Shamai rule 'Yachloku') on the basis of the principle that 'if someone has a Kosher Shtar, it is as if he had already claimed it in Beis-Din', in which case, the property is as much in the Chazakah of the creditors as of the heirs.

2)

(a)What distinction does the Mishnah in 'Get Pashut' draw between a Milveh bi'Shtar and a Milveh al Peh?

(b)What is the reason for this distinction?

(c)Why, in the case of a Milveh bi'Shtar, may the creditor claim from the Lekuchos, even if Achrayus was not inserted in the Shtar?

(d)On what condition is the creditor not permitted to claim from Meshubadim, even if it is a Milveh bi'Shetar?

2)

(a)The Mishnah in 'Get Pashut' teaches that the creditor may claim a Milveh bi'Shtar from Meshubadim (from the purchaser), but not a Milveh al Peh.

(b)The reason for this distinction lies in the fact that where there is a Shtar, there is a Kol (a rumor people know), which enables the would-be purchaser to make the necessary inquiries and spare himself a loss. In the case of a Milveh al Peh on the other, where there is no Kol, the purchaser is helpless to save himself from losing the field when the creditor claims it from him.

(c)In the case of a Milveh bi'Shtar, the creditor may claim from the Lekuchos, even if Achrayus was not inserted in the Shtar due to another principle 'Achrayus Ta'us Sofer Hu' (creditors expect this form of insurance against loss, and the omission is therefore an error on the part of the Sofer).

(d)The creditor may not however, claim from Meshubadim, if there are Bnei Chorin available (or that were still available at the time of purchase).

3)

(a)Shmuel asks whether 'de'Ikni ve'Kanah' is included in the Shibud. What does he mean by that?

(b)Why is Shmuel's She'eilah not relevant, according to Rebbi Meir?

(c)Then what is his She'eilah, according to the Rabanan?

(d)Why should a Shibud be better than a Kinyan in this regard?

3)

(a)Shmuel asks whether 'de'Ikni ve'Kanah' is included in the Shibud, by which he means to ask whether property that the debtor subsequently purchases and then sells is included in the Shibud, should the debtor stipulate it.

(b)Shmuel's She'eilah is not relevant according to Rebbi Meir because if one can acquire something that is not yet in the world, one can certainly place a Shibud on it.

(c)His She'eilah, according to the Rabanan, is whether, even though one cannot sell something that is not yet in the world, he can at least place a Shibud on it.

(d)A Shibud might be different than a Kinyan in this regard either because the land was already in the world, even though he did not yet own it, or because the Rabanan strengthened the Shibud of the creditor, so that people should be assured of retrieving their loans and therefore be willing to lend money to the poor (a Takanah known as 'Ne'ilas Deles' (describing what it prevents [closing the door on debtors]).

4)

(a)The Mishnah in Kesuvos discusses a case where Reuven produces a Shtar-Chov against Shimon, and Shimon counters this by producing a Shtar that Reuven sold him a field. What point is Shimon making? Why does he expect that to exempt from paying?

(b)Admon accepts Shimon's argument. What do the Chachamim counter?

(c)Rav Yosef tries to prove from the Chachamim that 'de'Ikni' is Meshubad (seeing as Shimon purchased the field after the loan took place). How does Rava refute this proof? What is the significance of 'the shirt on his back', quoted by Rava?

(d)What does the She'eilah incorporate, besides claiming a (later) field from the Lekuchos?

4)

(a)The Mishnah in Kesuvos discusses a case where Reuven produces a Shtar-Chov against Shimon, and Shimon counters this by producing a Shtar that Reuven sold him a field claiming that if as Reuven claims, he (Shimon) still owes him money, why did he sell him a field, instead of claiming the money directly to pay his debt?

(b)Admon accepts Shimon's argument. The Chachamim counter that, on the contrary, Reuven was smart in landing Shimon a field which he is now able to claim in lieu of his debt.

(c)Rav Yosef tries to prove from the Chachamim that 'de'Ikni' is Meshubad (seeing as Shimon purchased the field after the loan took place). Rava however, refutes this proof on the grounds that it is obvious that the creditor can claim from the debtor himself (just like he can claim even 'the shirt on his back', which is Metaltelin). Our She'eilah concerns claiming from the purchaser, which remains a She'eilah.

(d)Besides claiming a later field from the Lekuchos, the She'eilah also incorporates claiming a later field from the heirs.

5)

(a)How does Rav Chana try to resolve our She'eilah from the case of 'Naflah ha'Bayis Alav ve'al Aviv' in our Mishnah, where the father died first?

(b)Rav Nachman refutes the proof, quoting Ze'ira Chavrin (Ze'ira our colleague). What distinction did Ze'ira Chavrin make between Lekuchos and Yorshin?

(c)Rav Ashi refutes this however, by quoting a statement of Rav and Shmuel. What did Rav and Shmuel say about a Milveh al Peh?

(d)On what basis do we consider this case a Milveh al Peh?

5)

(a)Rav Chana tries to resolve our She'eilah from the case of 'Naflah ha'Bayis Alav v'Al Aviv' in our Mishnah, where the father died first and where the creditor now claims from the son, property which he inherited from his father (which he did not own at the time of the loan), a clear proof that 'de'Ikni ve'Kanah, Mishtabed'.

(b)Rav Nachman refutes the proof, quoting Ze'ira Chavrin (Ze'ira our colleague), who points out that our Mishnah is referring specifically to Yorshin, on whom there lies a Mitzvah to pay their father's debts (even without having written 'de'Ikni' in the Shtar). By Lekuchos, on the other hand, it is still possible to hold that what the debtor purchases later is not Meshubad.

(c)Rav Ashi refutes this however, by quoting a statement of Rav and Shmuel, who rule that the creditor can neither claim a Milveh al Peh from the Yorshin nor from the Lekuchos.

(d)We consider this case a Milveh al Peh since the property was only acquired later, and was therefore not included in the Shtar.

6)

(a)Why can we not answer that we do not hold like Rav and Shmuel?

(b)So how do we reconcile Shmuel's She'eilah with our Mishnah?

6)

(a)We cannot answer that we do not hold like Rav and Shmuel since it was Shmuel who posed the She'eilah in the first place, and if 'de'Ikni' is not Meshubad, he will be faced with a Kashya on his own statement.

(b)We reconcile Shmuel's She'eilah with our Mishnah by establishing the author of the Mishnah as Rebbi Meir (who holds 'Adam Makneh Davar she'Lo Ba le'Olam'), whilst Shmuel asked his She'eilah according to the Rabanan, as we explained earlier.

157b----------------------------------------157b

7)

(a)We have learned in the Mishnah in Shevi'is ' Shtarei-Chov ha'Mukdamin, Pesulin, ve'ha'Me'ucharin Kesheirin'. What is ...

1. ... a Shtar-Chov Mukdam'?

2. ... a Shtar-Chov Me'uchar'?

(b)Why is the former Pasul?

(c)What does Rav Ya'akov from Nahar Pakud in the name of Ravina try to prove from the fact that a Shtar-Chov Me'uchar is Kosher?

(d)How do we refute Ravina's proof? Who is the author of the Mishnah in Shevi'is?

7)

(a)We have learned in the Mishnah in Shevi'is 'Shtarei-Chov ha'Mukdamin, Pesulin, ve'ha'Me'ucharin Kesheirin'. A Shtar-Chov ...

1. ... Mukdam' is a Shtar-Chov that is pre-dated, either retroactively at the time of the loan, or because it was written before the loan took place.

2. ... Me'uchar' is a Shtar-Chov that is post-dated, either at the time of the loan, or because it was only written later.

(b)The former is Pasul because the Lekuchos, who will purchase land from the debtor without being aware of the as yet undocumented loan, have no way of safeguarding themselves from the creditor.

(c)Rav Ya'akov from Nahar Pakud in the name of Ravina tries to prove from the fact that a Shtar-Chov Me'uchar is Kosher that de'Ikni Kanah u'Machar, de'Ikni Kanah u'Mishtabed' must be Kosher.

(d)We refute Ravina's proof too by establishing the author of the Mishnah in Shevi'is as Rebbi Meir.

8)

(a)What will be the Din according to Rebbi Meir, if they did not insert ...

1. ... Achrayus in the Shtar at all?

2. ... 'de'Ikni' in a Shtar-Chov Me'uchar?

(b)Then why did we not ask from this case on Shmuel?

8)

(a)According to Rebbi Meir, if they did not insert ...

1. ... Achrayus in the Shtar at all the creditor cannot claim from Meshubadim.

2. ... 'de'Ikni' in a Shtar-Chov Me'uchar the Shtar is Pasul (like our Kashya).

(b)We did not ask from this case on Shmuel because it is uncommon to insert Achrayus in a Shtar in halves (i.e. general Shibud, but not 'de'Ikni').

9)

(a)The Mishnah in Gitin discusses Shevach Karka'os. What is 'Shevach Karka'os'?

(b)What does the Tana say about Shevach Karka'os? From whom may the purchaser claim a. the Keren, and b., the Shevach?

(c)What does Rav Mesharshiya in the name of Rava try to prove from here?

(d)How do we refute this proof, too?

9)

(a)The Mishnah in Gitin discusses Shevach Karka'os (the improvements that a purchaser made in a field before the seller's creditor claimed it, and which the purchaser then reclaims from the seller).

(b)The Tana permits him to claim the Keren from Meshubadim, but the Shevach only from Bnei-Chorin.

(c)Rav Mesharshiya in the name of Rava tries to prove from here that de'Ikni Lo Mishtabed', because if it was, what right would the creditor have to claim the Shevach from the purchaser in the first place?

(d)We refute this proof, too however by establishing the author as Rebbi Meir.

10)

(a)On the assumption that 'de'Ikni ... Mishtabed', what She'eilah do we ask regarding a case where the borrower borrowed twice and then acquired property?

(b)According to Rav Nachman, this She'eilah was asked of the Bnei Eretz Yisrael, who replied that the first creditor has the right to the newly-acquired property. Rav Huna says 'Yachloku'. What does Rabah bar Avuha say?

(c)What do they mean by 'Yachloku'?

10)

(a)On the assumption that 'de'Ikni ... Mishtabed', we ask what the Din will be in a case where the borrower borrowed twice and then acquired property which of the two creditors has the rights to it.

(b)According to Rav Nachman, this She'eilah was asked of the Bnei Eretz Yisrael, who replied that the first creditor has the right to the newly-acquired property. Rav Huna says 'Yachloku' and so does Rabah bar Avuha.

(c)By 'Yachloku', they mean that they divide it in proportion to the loan.

11)

(a)Ravina quotes the Mahadura Kama of Rav Ashi and the Mahadura Basra. What is the significance of ...

1. ... Mahadura Kama and Mahadura Basra, with regard to Rav Ashi?

2. ... the Chodshei ha'Kalah? What were the 'Chodshei ha'Kalah'?

(b)What did Rav Ashi rule in ...

1. ... the Mahadura Kama?

2. ... the Mahadura Basra?

(c)What is the Halachah?

11)

(a)Ravina quotes the Mahadura Kama of Rav Ashi and the Mahadura Basra. The significance of ...

1. ...Mahadura Kama with regard to Rav Ashi (who lived sixty years) is that it comprised the first thirty years of his life, when he finished all his learning the first time round, and Mahadura Basra, the second thirty years when he finished it the second time round.

2. ... the Chodshei ha'Kalah is that each Nisan and Tishri, he would review all his current learning.

(b)Rav Ashi ruled in ...

1. ... the Mahadura Kama that the first creditor had the rights to the property, but ...

2. ... in the Mahadura Basra 'Yachlohu'.

(c)The Halachah is 'Yachloku'.

12)

(a)Quoting once more from the Beraisa 'li'Shevach Karka'os Keitzad ... ', how do we query the previous ruling from the conclusion of the Beraisa 've'es ha'Shevach mi'Nechasim Bnei-Chorin'?

(b)How do we refute this Kashya?

(c)What does Shmuel then mean when he rules in Bava Metzi'a 'Ba'al-Chov Govah es ha'Shevach'?

(d)How come that in Bava Metzia, he rules 'Govin es ha'Shevach', whereas here he remains undecided?

(e)On what principle is the second answer based?

12)

(a)Quoting once more from the Beraisa 'li'Shevach Karka'os Keitzad ... ', we query the previous ruling from the conclusion of the Beraisa 've'es ha'Shevach mi'Nechasim Bnei-Chorin' which the purchaser only did after the loan, and which implies that the latter borrower (the purchaser, in this case) has the rights, and not 'Yachloku', as we just ruled.

(b)We refute this Kashya however by interpreting the Beraisa to mean half the Shevach.

(c)When Shmuel rules in Bava Metzia 'Ba'al-Chov Govah es ha'Shevach' he too means half the Shevach.

(d)And when in Bava Metzia, he rules 'Govin es ha'Shevach', even though here he remains undecided he is either referring to the opinion of Rebbi Meir, or resolving his own She'eilah ...

(e)... based on the principle 'Divrei Torah Aniyim be'Makom Echad va'Ashirim be'Makom Acher' (the Gemara sometimes omits something in one place, and explains it somewhere else).

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF