1)

(a)If the Beis-Din wrote a Pesicha on someone who ignored a summons, they only tear it up - when he actually appears in Beis-Din, not when he agrees to go. In the meantime, the Cherem remains in effect.

(b)Initially, we issue the identical ruling in a case of someone on whom Beis-Din issued a Pesicha because he refused to abide by Beis-Din's ruling. We conclude however - that the moment he undertakes to do so, Beis-Din will already tear it up.

(c)If Beis-Din issue a summons on Monday, in the event that he refuses to attend - they will issue him with a second summons on the Thursday and a third summons on the following Monday. Should he continue to ignore the summons, they will write the Pesicha on Tuesday.

(d)What did Rav Kahana reply when Rav Ashi asked him why he wrote a Pesicha on a woman the morning after the first summons, he replied - that it is only in the case of a man, who is sometimes out of town, that one gives three chances, but not a woman, who is generally in town.

2)

(a)Rav Yehudah rules that Beis-Din may not issue a summons during the months of Nisan and Tishri - because everyone is busy with the harvest of the corn and the grapes, respectively ...

(b)... and the same applies to - Erev Shabbos or Erev Yom-Tov.

(c)He permits Beis Din however, to issue a summons in Nisan and Tishri - to appear in Beis-Din in Iyar and Mar-Cheshvan, respectively ...

(d)but not on Erev Shabbos and Erev Yom-Tov to appear after Shabbos and Yom-Tov, respectively - because everyone is busy with preparations for Shabbos and Yom-Tov, and they are likely to forget by the following week.

3)

(a)Rav Nachman rules - that Beis-Din are not permitted to issue a summons to those who come to the Kalah (to hear the D'rashah each Erev Shabbos) and the Rigla (to hear the D'rashah about Hilchos Chag before each Yom-Tov) ...

(b)... because the thought that they might be issued a summons will deter people from coming to hear the D'rashah.

(c)If a claimant approached him at the Kalah or the Rigla with a request to invite his disputant to a Din-Torah, he would reply - that he had called everyone to attend the D'rashah for the benefit of the claimants.

(d)They changed this Din however - due to swindlers, who would come into town for business, but, in order to avoid being summoned to a Din Torah, they would enter the Beis-ha'Medrash making out that they had come for the D'rashah.

4)

(a)We learned in our Mishnah 'ha'Gozel u'Ma'achil es Banav') 'Im Hayah Davar she'Yesh bo Acharayus, Chayavin Leshalem'. We have already cited Rebbi speaking to his son, Rebbi Shimon, who interpreted 'Davar she'Yesh bo Acharayus' to mean - that if the stolen object is something that is easily recognizable such as a cow for plowing and a laden donkey that he leads, then the heirs are obligated to return it, out of respect for their father.

(b)Rav Kahana asked Rav about a couch to recline on and a table to eat on, which might be different than a cow for plowing - because, unlike the former, they are situated inside one's home and are not in full view of the public.

(c)Rav replied 'Ten le'Chacham va'Yechkam Od' - meaning the latter are considered 'Davar she'Yesh bo Acharayus' just like the former - since people who enter the home of the heirs will easily recognize them as property belonging to the original owner.

5)

(a)Our Mishnah forbids the exchange of coins from a tax-collector's box, or from the purse of the collector of the king's head-tax - neither may one accept Tzedakah from them.

(b)All this is permitted however - if the money is taken (not from the box or the purse into which he places the money, but) from his private home or from his shop in the market.

6)

(a)Despite the prohibition of changing coins from a tax-collector's box, the Beraisa permits someone who owes half a Dinar of taxes to give him a Dinar and to receive change - in order to spare himself the loss of half a Dinar.

(b)The problem with treating a tax-collector like a Ganav is - Shmuel's ruling 'Dina de'Malchusa Diyna', which legalizes the non-Jewish tax system and obligates everyone to pay their dues.

(c)Rebbi Chanina bar Kahana Amar Shmuel solves the problem by establishing the Mishnah by taxes that are not fixed (where it is the tax-collector who fixes the amounts everyone has to pay). de'Bei Rebbi Yanai establishes it - by a self-appointed tax-collector (even if the amounts he collects are determined by the government).

7)

(a)Others connect the above Machlokes Amora'im with the Mishnah in Kil'ayim - where the Tana prohibits the wearing of Kil'ayim on top of ten garments in order to evade paying taxes.

(b)The Tana Kama of another Beraisa forbids it, too, whereas Rebbi Shimon quoting Rebbi Akiva - permits it.

(c)The basis of their Machlokes regarding the wearing of Kil'ayim is - 'Davar she'Eino Miskaven' (a sin that one performs unintentionally (i.e. with an entirely different motive), which the Tana Kama forbids, and Rebbi Shimon Amar Rebbi Akiva permits.

(d)In spite of Shmuel's ruling 'Dina de'Malchusas Dina', Rebbi Akiva permits the evasion of taxes - either because he is speaking about an amount that the tax-collector fixed at his whim, or about a self-appointed tax-collector, as we explained above. Note, that nevertheless, the Tana Kama forbids it.

8)

(a)Yet others connect the same Machlokes with a Mishnah in Nedarim, which discusses Haragin, Charamin or Muchsin (tax-collectors) who demand fruit. The Tana there permits the victim - to make a Neder forbidding all fruit on oneself should they not be Terumah, or should they not be the king's property (even if they are not [see Tosfos DH 'Nodrin']).

(b)Charamin are trouble-shooters who rob people of their money or property.

(c)Rebbi Chanina bar Kahana Amar Shmuel establishes the Mishnah by taxes that are not fixed and de'Bei Rebbi Yanai, by a self-appointed tax-collector. Rav Ashi establishes it - by a Nochri tax-collector (on the condition described by the Beraisa that we are about to cite) ...

(d)... whom he is permitted to cheat, provided the gentile is unaware that he is lying, so that there is no Chilul Hash-m.

9)

(a)Rav Ashi basis his ruling on a Beraisa, where, as a last resort, Rebbi Yishmael permits one to use force to avoid paying a Yisrael or a Nochri Anas who is claiming from him illegal taxes. To avoid using force - he is permitted to misquote Jewish law or even secular law.

(b)Rebbi Akiva ...

1. ... forbids going against the gentile tax-collector by force, because of the Chilul Hash-m involved.

2. ... agrees with Rebbi Yishmael though - with regard to the Heter of Gezel Akum (provided there is no Chilul Hash-m).

10)

(a)We query Rebbi Akiva however, from a D'rashah that Rebbi Shimon cites him as having made when he came from Zafirin, when he Darshened from the Pasuk in Behar ...

1. ... "Acharei Nimkar, Ge'ulah Tih'yeh Lo" - that it is forbidden to take the Eved Ivri who is sold to a Nochri and march him to freedom without paying for him ('Gezel Akum, Asur').

2. ... ve'Chishav Im Konehu" - that the Akum is not entitled to charge any price that suits him (only based on the price that he paid for him).

(b)To resolve the discrepancy in R. Akiva's rulings, Rav Yosef's suggests that Rebbi Akiva's latter ruling pertains to a Ger Toshav - who stops serving idols, though he continues to eat Neveilah).

(c)Abaye refutes this answer however, on the basis of the Pasuk quoted by Rebbi Akiva, which incorporates both a Ger Toshav and a Nochri).

(d)Besides a Nochri and Ger Toshav, the Pasuk "ve'Nimkar le'Ger Toshav, O le'Eiker Mishpachas Ger" also incorporates (someone who is sold to work for) the Avodah-Zarah itself (which we learn from "O le'Eiker").

11)

(a)In spite of having concluded that Rebbi Akiva forbids Gezel Akum, Rava finally explains the inference from his previous statement (that if not for the Chilul Hash-m, one would be permitted to avoid paying a Moches Nochri taxes) - because whereas withholding from him one's debts is permitted) stealing from him is forbidden.

(b)Abaye asks Rava why, in that case, Rebbi Akiva is then with regard to releasing an Eved Ivri from the ownership of a Nochri, seeing as one is only depriving the owner of the Eved Ivri's work (which is no more than a debt). When we reply 'Rava le'Ta'amei ... ' bearing a in mind that it is Rava who explains Rebbi Akiva in this light), we mean that Rava follows what he maintains elsewhere - that the master acquires an Eved Ivri [not just his work, but with a Kinyan ha'Guf]). Consequently, releasing an Eved Ivri from the ownership of a Nochri is a matter of ezel, not just Hafka'as Halva'ah.

(c)Rav Bibi bar Gidal Amar Rebbi Shimon Chasida ...

1. ... learns from the Pasuk in Va'eschanan "ve'Achalta es Kol ha'Amim asher Hash-m Elokecha Nosen lach" - that only the property of the nations that are under your jurisdictions is permitted to you, but not the property of other nations ('Gezel Akum Asur').

2. ... based on the D'rashah of Rav Chama bar Guri'ah Amar Rav , learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "le'Chol Aveidas Achicha" - that the obligation of returning a lost article is confined to one belonging to a Jew, but not if it belongs to a Nochri ('Aveidas Nochri Mutar').

(d)And in the same context, Ravina learns from the Pasuk there "u'Metzasah" - that this concession is not confined to not picking up the lost article of a Nochri, but that it even exempts someone who picked it up from returning it (because "u'Metzasah" implies that he has already picked it up).

12)

(a)Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir is strict even with regard to Aveidas Akum if it will lead to Chilul Hash-m.

(b)Shmuel paid a Nochri (who Chazal often refer to as Kutim) three Dinrim for a golden dish. The Nochri erroneously - accepted the three Dinrim instead of four. In addition, he thought the dish was made of copper.

(c)We can learn from here that one is permitted to mislead an Akum into making a mistake and to then take advantage of it.

(d)Rav Kahana too, paid a Zuz less for the hundred jars that he bought from a Nochri (also through the Nochri's error). In addition, the Nochri miscounted and gave him twenty jars more than they had agreed.

(e)

1. When Ravina and a Nochri bought a palm-tree for firewood, Ravina instructed his servant - to count out the logs from the thick end, since he noticed that the Nochri was careful to count the logs, but didn't take note as to their thickness.

2. When they walked past a vine with clusters of grapes, Rav Ashi instructed his servant to - fetch him some grapes provided they belonged to a Kuti, but not if the owner was a Yisrael (see Tosfos and Shitah Mekubetzes).

3. When the owner, who overheard his instructions, queried him, Rav Ashi replied that whereas a Yisrsael would refuse to take money, a Nochri would not (and he not want the grapes free of charge). (See Tosfos and Shitah Mekubetzes).

13)

(a)From the fact that the municipal officers used to cut down palm-trees and make bridges, and everyone would use those bridges - Rava brings a proof for Shmuel, that 'Dina de'Malchusa Dina'.

(b)Abaye asked Rava how we know that this is not because the owners were Meya'esh, to which Rava replied - because Yi'ush without Shinuy Reshus is not considered Yi'ush (see also Tosfos DH 'Heichi Meya'ashi').

(c)Despite the fact that the officers were instructed to cut down trees from each valley, and they cut them all from one valley, we refer to this as 'Dina de'Malchusa' - because the officer of a king has, to a certain degree, the power of the king himself.

(d)Rava concludes that the residents of that particular valley had only themselves to blame - for not claiming reimbursement for all the trees that they should have provided.

14)

(a)Rava states that if three partners already took their share of the crops home, and the fourth partner is still working in the barn when the tax man claims taxes from him, he pays the tax. By this he means - that the fourth partner pays for all the partners, from whom he may later reclaim what he laid out.

(b)The other ramifications of Rava's statement - are that the tax-collector has acted within his rights. On the assumption that he purchased the rights from the king, if he is a Yisrael, he is permitted to retain what he took, and in the event that he is a Nochri, one is permitted to purchase it from him.

(c)In the equivalent case, where the fourth man is a resident-gardener - then he pays tax only for himself (since he is not a land-owner), and it is illegal for the tax-collector to claim the taxes of the others from him.

15)

(a)Rava also permits the tax man to claim a security from Reuven on behalf of Shimon, if the latter is not available to pay his taxes, because of 'Dina de'Malchusa'. Assuming that this applies both to land-taxes and to head-taxes, it will be prohibited - with regard to claiming last year's head-tax, since the tax-man has generally made up with the king and paid all his dues up to the end of the year.

(b)Rava forbids the purchase of animals from Nochrim who rent out their animals to manure fields, inside the T'chum (the city boundaries), but one may purchase them outside the T'chum (because the owners are Meya'esh). The basis of the prohibition is - the possibility of Jewish-owned animals having strayed over to the Nochri's, which now graze with his own animals, and which he has no authority to sell.

(c)Ravina forbids such a purchase even outside the T'chum - in the event that the owner of the animal is running after his animal (a sure sign that he has not been Meya'esh).