Abaye also queries Rav Yosef from a Beraisa where Rebbi Dosa ben Horkinas, who rules that the Mitzvah of Reishis ha'Gez is only applicable to some owns at least five sheep each of which produces 'Manah u'Peras'. A Manah is a 'Litra' a Pras - half a Manah (the word 'Pras' means a half).

The Chachamim say 'Chamesh Recheilos Gozezos Kol she'Hein', which Rav interprets to mean - a Manah u'Peras.

We add to this that - each sheep must produce at least a fifth of a Manah.

Rav Yosef refutes Abaye's proof from here that sometimes 'Kol she'Hu' is La'av Davka (not meant literally) - by confining that ruling to that case, where the Chachamim only say 'Kol she'Hu' to counter the big Shi'ur of Rebbi Dosa ben Horkinus (but normally, 'Kol she'Hu' is Davka).

The difference whether a person says ...

... 'Metaltela'i li'Pelanya' or 'Kol Metaltela'i li'Pelanya' is that -- the former precludes wheat and barley, whereas the latter includes them.

... 'Kol Metaltela'i li'Pelanya' or 'Kol di'Metaltel li'Pelanya' is that - the former precludes the lower mill-stone in the sale, whereas the latter includes it.

The reason for the difference in the latter case, is - because, on the one hand, the lower mill-stone is not considered Mitaltelin, because it is not usually removed from its place (even in order to repair it), whereas on the other, it is considered 'Midi di'Metaltel' since it is moveable.

We ask whether Avadim are considered Karka or Metaltelin concerning someone who says 'Metaltela'i li'Peloni'. The She'eilah, considering that Avadim are considered Karka in the realm of Shevu'ah and Kinyan is - whether or not, it is only vis-a-vis Torah issues that Avadim are considered Karka, but not when it comes to issues connected with people's statements, who perhaps consider Avadim Metaltelin, since they are, after all, moveable ('Lashon Torah L'chud, Lashon b'nei Adam L'chud').

The source for considering Avadim Karka is - the Pasuk in Bechukosai "ve'Hisnacheltem osam li'Veneichem Achareichem" (the term 'Nachalah' generally pertains to Karka).

Rav Ivya tries to resolve the She'eilah from a Beraisa, which includes the houses and the water-pits ... in the sale of a town, but not the Metaltelin. If the seller were to add 'Hi ve'Chol Mah she'be'Tochah' - then 'even animals and Avadim would be included'.

Rav Ivya tries to prove that Avadim must be Metaltelin - from the fact that they are precluded from the sale in the Reisha.

Rav Ashi counters Rav Avya's proof however - by pointing out that if they are considered Karka, then why does the Tana need to insert the word 'even' in the Seifa?

Rav Ashi explains the Beraisa by differentiating between Avadim and regular Metaltelin (if they are considered Metaltelin), or regular Karka (if they are considered Karka) inasmuch as they move, and are precluded from the Din in the Reisha irrespective of whether they are considered Karka or Metaltelin.

Ravina tries to resolve the She'eilah (whether Avadim are considered Karka or Metaltelin) from the Beraisa that we quoted on the previous Amud 'Shiyer Karka Kol she'Hu, Lo Yeitzei ben Chorin', which, as Rav Dimi bar Yosef Amar Rebbi Elazar explained there - incorporates Metaltelin.

And Rav Nachman explained to Rava that Chazal considered Metaltelin a Shiyur with regard to an Eved because Avadim are considered Metaltelin, yet they did not consider Metaltelin a Shiyur with regard to a woman's Kesubah - because the chief claim of a Kesubah is from Karka.

This seemingly proves that - Avadim are considered Metaltelin.

Rav Ashi refutes Ravina's proof however, on the grounds that even if, according to the Chachamim, Avadim were considered Karka, the Eved would not go free - because it is not 'K'rus Gita'.

We learn that a Get Shichrur requires K'rus Gita - from the 'Hekesh' of "Lah" "Lah" from a Get (where the Torah writes "Sefer K'risus".

According to Rabeinu Chananel this simply means that any Get Shichrur that includes rights for the master, is invalid, since it does not effect a clean break with the Eved. It might also mean that - seeing as the master holds back Metaltelin in the Sh'tar Shichrur, without specifying what he meant, perhaps he also meant to include the Eved.

Rava Amar Rav Nachman lists five donors, 'Shechiv-M'ra, Avdo, Ishto, Banav and Mavrachas, about whom he says - 'ad she'Yicht'vu Kol Nichseihem' (but if they retain anything, then the respective Din in each case will not apply).

We have discussed all of these earlier, with the exception of Mavrachas - a woman who is about to get married and who, to avoid her property falling into the hands of her husband, writes all her property to a third person. Consequently, whenever she wishes, she will be able to reclaim it from the beneficiary.

In the event that she retains some of the property - the beneficiary will be permitted to keep the gift.

In all the above cases it makes no difference whether the Shiyur consists of Karka or Metaltelin - except for the case of Kesubah where, as we have already learned, the Shiyur must be Karka, for her to lose it.

Sometimes, says Ameimar, Metaltelin is considered a Shiyur even by Kesubah too - if it is inserted in the Kesubah and is still 'Be'en' (available)...

... as Amimar himself taught in Kesuvos - since a woman may claim her Kesubah from them, they are therefore considered a Shiyur.

We now list all the things that are included in the word 'Nechasim'. We learn from the Mishnah ...

... in Pe'ah 'ha'Kosev Kol Nechasav le'Avdo, Yeitzei ben Chorin' that - Avadim are included in 'Nechasim'.

... in Kidushin 'Nechasim she'Yesh lahen Acharayus Niknin be'Kesef, u'vi'Sh'tar u've'Chazakah' that - Karka is included, too.

... there 've'she'Ein lahen Acharayus, Ein Niknin Ela bi'Meshichah' that - Metaltelin such as clothes are also included.

And when the Tana continues 've'she'Ein lahen Acharayus, Niknin im Nechasim she'Yesh lahen Acharayus', he is referring to - all forms of Metaltelin, even money.

We know that the Tana means to incorporate money in this Halachah, as well as other forms of Metaltelin, from the incident with Rav Papa and Rav Shmuel bar Acha where the bei Chuza'i owed him - twelve thousand Zuz.

Karka is called 'Nechasim she'Yesh lahen Acharayus' - because, due to the fact that it cannot be destroyed (even by fire), people tend to rely on it with regard to claiming their debts.

Rav Papa retrieved his debt - via Rav Shmuel bar Acha, whom he wrote a Sh'tar Harsha'ah in which he was Makneh the money to him together with the threshold of his house (which he acquired either with a Kinyan Sudar or with a Chazakah).

Rav Papa went out to meet Rav Shmuel bar Acha as far as Tavach - because he was happy that he had brought him back his money.

Others say that 'ad Tavach' means that he went to meet him half way, to prevent him from acquiring the money for himself. We refute this explanation however on the grounds that - the Sh'tar Harsha'ah that he wrote made it abundantly clear that he was no more than his Shali'ach.

Rava bar Yitzchak Amar Rav describes 'two Sh'taros'. If someone asks two people to make a Kinyan on his field on behalf of a friend and to write him a Sh'tar, it is obvious that once the Kinyan has been made, the seller may no longer retract from the sale - though he is permitted to withdraw his instructions to write the Sh'tar.

But if he said 'al-M'nas she'Tichtevu lo es ha'Shtar' then - as long as he has not handed the purchaser the Sh'tar, he may retract even from the transaction.

Based on the Mishnah in Get Pashut, Rav Chiya bar Avin Amar Rav Huna adds a third case of 'Shtar' to the previous two. If the seller wrote such a Shtar, following which the purchaser acquired the field with Kesef, Shtar or Chazakah - he acquires the Sh'tar as well.

We prove from Rav Chiya bar Avin that - a Shtar is also included in the term 'Nechasim' (since he speaks about acquiring the Sh'tar ('Nechasim she'Ein lahen Achrayus'), together with the field ('Nechasim she'Yesh lahen Achrayus').