[48a - 28 lines; 48b - 42 lines]
*********************GIRSA SECTION*********************
We recommend using the textual changes suggested by the Bach and the marginal notes of the Vilna Shas. This section is devoted to any OTHER important corrections that Acharonim have pointed out in the Gemara, Rashi and Tosfos.
[1] Rashi 48b DH v'Hacha ã"ä åäëà:
The words "d'Rebbi Meir Is Lei" ãøáé îàéø àéú ìéä
should be "d'Rebbi Meir d'Is Lei" ãøáé îàéø ãàéú ìéä
[2] Rashi DH Ika d'Masnei ã"ä àéëà ãîúðé:
The words "d'Milsei d'Rebbi Yehudah" ãîéìúéä ãøáé éäåãä
should be "a'Milsei d'Rebbi Yehudah" àîìúéä ãøáé éäåãä
*******************************************************
1)[line 4]àí ðúðå òã ùìà çì÷åIM NASNU AD SHE'LO CHALKU- if they gave [the five Shekalim to the Kohen] before they divided the estate, then it has been given (because prior to the division of the inheritance, they are obligated to give the Pidyon)
2)[line 9]àùúòáãï ìäå ìðëñéISHTAIBDAN LEHU L'NICHSEI (SHIBUD)
When a person borrows money and writes a Shtar for the creditor to use to collect the loan (or becomes indebted in some other way, such as a man's obligation to pay for his son's Pidyon ha'Ben or his wife's Kesuvah), this creates a lien (Shi'abud Karka'os) on all the land that the debtor owns, making it mortgaged (Meshu'abad) to his creditor. If he sells the property afterwards, the creditor may collect the property from the purchasers in payment of the loan.
3)[line 16]àé áãéãê îñé÷ðà, îðúà ãéãê ÷à ù÷éìðàIY B'DIDACH MASIKNA, MANASA DIDACH KA SHAKILNA- if my claim is from you, I am taking your portion
4)[line 19]ðëñé ãáø àéðéù àéðåï òøáéï áéäNICHSEI D'VAR INISH INUN AREVIN BEI- a man's properties are guarantors for his debt
5)[line 22]å÷é''ì ãìà éúáòV'KAIMA LAN D'LO YISBA- and we have already explained the Mishnah in Bava Basra to mean that the lender may not claim his money from the guarantor first (before claiming it from the borrower himself)
6)[line 27]äàçéï ùçì÷å îçöä éåøùéï åîçöä ì÷åçåúHA'ACHIN SHE'CHALKU MECHETZAH YORSHIN U'MECHETZAH LEKUCHOS
(a)When a person dies, his estate is divided up among his sons. The Amora'im argue whether the way the estate is ultimately divided can retroactively determine what each brother inherited at the time of the father's death, or not. Rebbi Yochanan (Gitin 48a) is of the opinion that even when the brothers later divide the estate, we cannot determine retroactively that the land each brother now has is the same land he inherited at the time of death. Rather, we say that by dividing up the property, the brothers agree to "trade" their true portions, wherever they are, with each other for portions of equal value elsewhere ("ha'Achin she'Chalku Lekuchos Havu"). Rav Asi is in doubt as to whether they are considered Yorshim or Lekuchos, and, therefore, he rules that the brothers are partially liable, as if they are half Yorshim and half Lekuchos.
(b)For practical differences between the two opinions, see Background to Bava Basra 107:4.
7)[last line]ìàå ëëúåáä áùèøîìåä äëúåáä áúåøäMILVEH HA'KESUVAH BA'TORAH LAV K'CHESUVAH B'SHTAR DAMYA
There is an argument whether a monetary obligation arising from a Torah law (such as payment for damages, Erchin, or Pidyon ha'Ben), makes a person's property Meshu'abad (see above, entry #2) just like a debt for which a contract was written. If it does, then the recipients of these payments have the right to collect their debts from land which the liable party sold or mortgaged after the Torah obligated the person in this payment. In addition, the payments may be collected from the heirs after the death of their father.
48b----------------------------------------48b
8)[line 10]òùøä æåæ ìæä åòùøä æåæ ìæäASARAH ZUZ L'ZEH VA'ASARAH ZUZ L'ZEH- each one has ten Zuz; that is, each one has 2 1/2 Sela (1 Shekel of the Torah = 1 Sela of Chazal = 4 Zuzim)