1)

(a)Rava Amar Chasa cites Rav Ami, who asked whether the four things in our Mishnah not subject to Ona'ah, are nevertheless subject to Bitul Mekach. What are the ramifications of saying that they are?

(b)The reason for saying that they are, is because they are only precluded from "Al Tonu", but not from Bitul Mekach. Why on the other hand, might they not?

(c)Rav Nachman quoting Chasa, informs us that Rav Ami himself later resolved the She'eilah. What did he decide?

1)

(a)Rava Amar Chasa cites Rav Ami, who asked whether the four things in our Mishnah which are not subject to Ona'ah, are subject to Bitul Mekach. If they are this means that if the excess charge amounts to more than a sixth, the sale will be void.

(b)The reason for saying that they are, is because they are only precluded from "Al Tonu", but not from Bitul Mekach. On the other hand, they might not be because seeing as it is neither a case of Davar she'be'Minyan, nor did the one deliberately mislead the other, Bitul Mekach is merely an extension of Ona'ah.

(c)Rav Nachman quoting Rav Chasa, informs us that Rav Ami himself later resolved the She'eilah. He decided 'Ona'ah Ein Lahem, Bitul Mekach Yesh Lahem'.

2)

(a)Rebbi Yonah quoting Rebbi Yochanan says 'Ona'ah Ein Lahem, Bitul Mekach Yesh Lahem' with regard to Hekdesh. What does Rebbi Yirmiyah quoting Rebbi Yochanan say?

(b)On what grounds do we say that ...

1. ... Rebbi Yonah certainly agrees with Rebbi Yirmiyah?

2. ...Rebbi Yirmiyah will not agree with Rebbi Yonah?

(c)What is Shmuel's reason?

2)

(a)Rebbi Yonah quoting Rebbi Yochanan says 'Ona'ah Ein Lahem, Bitul Mekach Yesh Lahem' with regard to Hekdesh. Rebbi Yirmiyah quoting Rebbi Yochanan, says it with regard to Karka.

(b)We say that ...

1. ... Rebbi Yonah certainly agrees with Rebbi Yirmiyah because if Bitul Mekach applies to Hekdesh, which is not subject to error, then it will certainly apply to a Hedyot, who is.

2. ... Rebbi Yirmiyah will not agree with Rebbi Yonah because he only says 'Bitul Mekach Yesh Lahem' by a Hedyot, but not by Hekdesh, on account of Shmuel, who said 'Hekdesh Shaveh Manah she'Chilelo al Shaveh P'rutah, Mechulal'.

(c)Shmuel's reason is because, firstly, Hekdesh is not subject to Ona'ah, and secondly, Ta'us does not apply either, because nobody erred.

3)

(a)The Mishnah in Temurah says that someone who declares on a blemished Hekdesh animal 'Harei Zu Mechulal al Zu', Yotzei le'Chulin, ve'Tzarich La'asos lo Damim'. What does the latter statement mean?

(b)According to Rebbi Yochanan, 've'Tzarich La'asos lo Damim' is only mi'de'Rabanan. what does Resh Lakish say?

(c)Their Machlokes is based on the interpretation of "Erk'cha". How does each one interpret it?

(d)Why can they not be arguing over ...

1. ... 'bi'Chedei Ona'ah?

2. ... 'Yoser mi'Chedei Ona'ah? On whose opinion would this pose a Kashya?

3)

(a)The Mishnah in Temurah say about someone who declares on a blemished Hekdesh animal 'Harei Zu Mechulal al Zu', Yotzei le'Chulin, ve'Tzarich La'asos lo Damim'. The latter statement means that if the Chulin animal is worth less than the Hekdesh one, he remains obligated to make up the difference to Hekdesh.

(b)According to Rebbi Yochanan, 've'Tzarich La'asos lo Damim' is only mi'd'Rabanan. Resh Lakish says that it is d'Oraisa.

(c)Their Machlokes is based on the interpretation of "Erk'cha" whether the Torah means the full value (Resh Lakish) or whatever one pays for it (Rebbi Yochanan).

(d)They cannot be arguing over ...

1. ... 'bi'Chedei Ona'ah because everyone agrees that Hekdesh is not subject to Ona'ah min ha'Torah, so how can Resh Lakish say otherwise.

2. ... 'Yoser mi'Chedei Ona'ah because, according to Rebbi Yonah, Rebbi Yochanan holds of Bitul Mekach by Hekdesh, so why does he say here that 've'Tzarich La'asos lo Damim' is only mi'd'Rabanan.

4)

(a)How do we therefore reestablish the Machlokes, according to Rebbi Yonah?

(b)Initially, we base the Machlokes on Shmuel. What will then be the reasoning of ...

1. ... Resh Lakish?

2. ... Rebbi Yochanan?

(c)And how will we explain the Machlokes, assuming that both opinions hold like Shmuel?

4)

(a)According to Rebbi Yonah therefore we switch the opinions, Rebbi Yochanan holds 've'Tzarich La'asos ... ' is d'Oraisa, and Resh Lakish, d'Rabanan. Note, since we are now speaking about Bitul Mekach, 've'Tzarich La'asos ... ' must be a matter (not of adding money to make up the difference, but) of ensuring that the Chulin animal is of equal value to start off with.

(b)Initially, we base the Machlokes on Shmuel. Consequently ...

1. ... Resh Lakish will holds like Shmuel, whereas ...

2. ... Rebbi Yochanan will not.

(c)Assuming that both opinions hold like Shmuel they will argue over whether Shmuel even permits Yoser mi'Chedei Ona'ah Lechatchilah (Resh Lakish), or only Bedi'eved (Rebbi Yochanan [based on their respective interpretations of "Erk'cha"]).

5)

(a)Alternatively, they argue over bi'Chedei Ona'ah, and it is not necessary to switch their opinions. And we answer the original Kashya (that Hekdesh is not subject to Ona'ah) by establishing the Machlokes like Rav Chisda. What does Rav Chisda say? How does he explain 'Ein Lahem Ona'ah'?

(b)What is then the reasoning of ...

1. ... Resh Lakish?

2. ... Rebbi Yochanan?

(c)Why is it not even possible to switch Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish, according to this opinion?

5)

(a)Alternatively, they argue over bi'Chedei Ona'ah, and it is not necessary to switch their opinions, because we answer the original Kashya (that Hekdesh is not subject to Ona'ah) by establishing the Machlokes like Rav Chisda who explains 'Ein Lahem Ona'ah' to mean 'Einan be'Toras Ona'ah' (meaning that Hekdesh can retract even for the slightest discrepancy in price, even if it is less than a sixth).

(b)

1. Resh Lakish will then hold like Rav Chisda.

2. Rebbi Yochanan will learn 'Ein Lahem Ona'ah' literally.

(c)It is not even possible to switch Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish, according to this opinion because Rebbi Yochanan said 'Ona'ah Ein Lahem, Bitul Mekach Yesh Lahem', clearly indicating that he does not learn 'Ona'ah Ein Lahem' like Rav Chisda (according to whom 'Bitul Mekach Yesh Lahem' would be meaningless).

57b----------------------------------------57b

6)

(a)How will Rav Chisda explain ...

1. ... the Reisha of the Beraisa 'Ribis ve'Ona'ah le'Hedyot, ve'Ein Ribis ve'Ona'ah le'Hekdesh'?

2. ... the Seifa 'Zeh Chomer be'Hedyot mi'be'Hekdesh'?

(b)Then why does the Tana not add 'Zeh Chomer be'Hekdesh mi'be'Hedyot' with regard to Ona'ah (since Hekdesh there is more stringent than Hedyot)?

6)

(a)Rav Chisda will explain ...

1. ... the Reisha of the Beraisa 'Ribis ve'Ona'ah le'Hedyot, ve'Ein Ribis ve'Ona'ah le'Hekdesh' like he explained our Mishnah 'Ein Ribis ve'Toras Ona'ah le'Hekdesh'.

2. ... the Seifa 'Zeh Chomer be'Hedyot mi'be'Hekdesh' with reference to Ribis only.

(b)The Tana did not add 'Zeh Chomer be'Hekdesh mi'be'Hedyot' with regard to Ona'ah (despite the fact that Hekdesh there is more stringent than Hedyot) because 'Zeh' implies that this case is unique, whereas in reality, there are numerous cases where Hekdesh is more stringent than Hedyot.

7)

(a)What is the problem with establishing Ribis by Hekdesh in a case where the treasurer lent someone a hundred Zuz for a hundred and twenty?

(b)But Me'ilah only applies be'Shogeg. What makes this case a Shogeg?

(c)Who has to pay Hekdesh? How much does he have to pay?

7)

(a)The problem with establishing Ribis by Hekdesh in a case where the treasurer lent someone a hundred Zuz for a hundred and twenty is that then the money would go out to Chulin, and would indeed be subject to Ribis as the property of the Gizbar (the treasurer).

(b)Me'ilah only applies be'Shogeg, and what makes this case a Shogeg is the fact that the Gizbar thought that such a transaction is permitted in order to make money for Hekdesh.

(c)The Gizbar will have to pay Hekdesh the principal plus a fifth. (a hundred and twenty five Zuz).

8)

(a)We establish the case of Ribis by someone who undertook to supply flour for the Menachos and the price rose from four Sa'ah per Sela to three, or dropped from three to four. How much will the supplier be obligated to supply in either case?

(b)Why does the Tana refer to this as Ribis, seeing as no loan took place?

8)

(a)We establish the case of Ribis by someone who undertook to supply flour for the Menachos and the price rose from four Sa'ah per Sela to three, or dropped from three to four. Either way the supplier is obligated to supply four Sa'ah (because we have a principle that Hekdesh never loses).

(b)Despite the fact that no loan took place, the Tana refers to it as Ribis because the Chachamim forbade lending a Sa'ah of fruit for a Sa'ah of fruit before the price has been fixed, since it looks like Ribis) as we will see in the following Perek.

9)

(a)Rav Papa establishes the case where the Gizbar lent someone stones for building, on interest. He is not Mo'el because of a statement of Shmuel. What did Shmuel say about the building of Hekdesh? Why is it not subject to Me'ilah?

(b)Why did they employ this method?

(c)Why did Rav Papa prefer this explanation to the previous one?

9)

(a)Rav Papa establishes the case when the Gizbar lent someone stones for building, on interest. He is not Mo'el because Shmuel said 'Bonin be'Chol, ve'Achar-Kach Makdishin' (which means that they would obtain all building materials on credit, and not declare them Hekdesh until the work was complete. Only then, would they pay for the materials which then became sanctified.

(b)They employed this method to avoid the workers and the people from being Mo'el, as they would inevitably sit on the Hekdesh articles and use them.

(c)Rav Papa prefers this explanation to the previous one because this way 'Ribis' pertains to a loan, which is Ribis d'Oraisa, and not just to Ribis d'Rabanan, as in the first explanation.

10)

(a)Our Mishnah also precluded the four things (Karka'os, Avadim, Shetaros and Hekdesh) from the Din of Kefel, and he learns the first three from a 'Klal u'Prat u'K'lal', from the Pasuk in Mishpatim. (in connection with To'en Ta'anas Ganav or from Ganav himself). "Al Kol D'var Pesha" is the first 'Klal', and "al Kol Aveidah asher Yomar" is the second. How does the Tana learn from the Prat "al Shor, al Chamor, al Seh al Salmah" to preclude ...

1. ... Karka'os?

2. ... Shetaros?

(b)From where does he then learn to preclude Avadim?

(c)What does he learn from the Pasuk there "Ki Yiten Ish el Re'eihu"?

(d)And from where does he then learn to preclude all of the above from the Din of Arba'ah va'Chamishah?

10)

(a)Our Mishnah also precluded the four things (Karka'os, Avadim, Sh'taros and Hekdesh) from the Din of Kefel, and he learns the first three from a 'K'lal u'Prat u'K'lal', from the Pasuk in Mishpatim (in connection with To'en Ta'anas Ganav or Ganav himself). "Al Kol D'var Pesha" is the first 'K'lal', and "al Kol Aveidah asher Yomar" is the second. The Tana learns from the P'rat "al Shor, al Chamor, al Seh al Salmah" to preclude ...

1. ... Karka'os because the P'rat is movable, whereas they are not.

2. ... Sh'taros because the P'rat has intrinsic value, whereas they do not.

(b)He precludes Avadim because they are compared to Karka (as we explained earlier).

(c)From the Pasuk there "Ki Yiten Ish el Re'eihu" he precludes Hekdesh from the Din of Kefel.

(d)And he precludes all of the above from the Din of Arba'ah va'Chamishah from the fact that they are Patur from Kefel, because the Torah writes "Arba'ah va'Chamishah", and not 'Sheloshah ve'Arba'ah'.

11)

(a)What does the Tana learn from ...

1. ... a 'Klal u'Prat u'K'lal' from the Pasuk (Ibid., in connection with a Shomer Chinam) "Ki Yiten Ish el Re'eihu (K'lal) Kesef O Keilim (Prat) Li'shmor (Prat)"?

2. ... "el Re'eihu"?

(b)And what does he learn from a 'Klal u'Prat u'K'lal' from the Pasuk (Ibid., in connection with a Shomer Sachar) "Ki Yiten Ish el Re'eihu (K'lal), "Chamor O Shor O Seh" (Prat), ve'Chol Beheimah Li'shmor" (K'lal)?

11)

(a)The Tana learns from ...

1. ... a 'K'lal u'Prat u'K'lal' from the Pasuk (Ibid.) "Ki Yiten Ish el Re'eihu (K'lal) Kesef O Keilim (P'rat) Li'shmor (P'rat)" that a Shomer Chinam is Patur from swearing on Karka'os, Sh'taros and Avadim.

2. ... "el Re'eihu" that he does not swear on Hekdesh either.

(b)And he learns from a 'K'lal u'Prat u'K'lal' from the Pasuk (Ibid.) "Ki Yiten Ish el Re'eihu (K'lal), "Chamor O Shor O Seh" (P'rat), ve'Chol Beheimah Li'shmor" (K'lal) that a Shomer Sachar is exempt from paying in all four cases.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF