1)

(a)Rava rules that if someone gives a woman a Get on condition that she gives him two hundred Zuz, which he subsequently accepts ...

1. ... willingly - she is divorced.

2. ... against his will - the Get is invalid.

(b)He extrapolates the latter ruling - from the fact that Hillel needed to institute a Takanah, indicating that normally, what a person receives against his will is not considered his.

(c)Rav Papa (or Rav Ashi) queries Rava's proof however - on the grounds that Hillel is speaking about a case where the recipient is not present. Perhaps, in a case where he is - even he would agree that what a person receives against his will is considered his.

2)

(a)Consequently, in the second Lashon, Rava rules that - either way, in his presence, the Get is valid, irrespective of whether he received the money willingly or not, and Hillel made his Takanah specifically when the recipient is not present.

(b)And this time Rav Papa (or Rav Ashi) objects - on the grounds that perhaps Hillel instituted his Takanah in a case where the owner was absent (not to preclude a case where he was present, only) - because that happened to be the case with which he was dealing, but in reality, there is no difference between whether the recipient is present or absent (like Rava ruled in the first Lashon).

3)

(a)The Tana Kama in our Mishnah precludes from the K'lal that whatever is inside the walls of the town is included in Batei Arei Chomah - fields.

(b)Rebbi Meir - includes them.

(c)According to Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah, a house in the wall does not have the Din of Batei Arei Chomah. Rebbi Shimon maintains that - the outer wall of the house is considered the wall of the town, rendering the town a walled one.

4)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa - incorporates olive-presses, bathhouses, cupboards, dove-cots, and various-shaped pits in the Din of Batei Arei Chomah.

(b)He learns this from the words "Asher ba'Ir", whilst "Bayis", in his opinion - comes to preclude fields.

(c)Rebbi Meir includes fields too, from "Asher ba'Ir" (in the Pasuk in B'har "ve'Kam ha'Bayis asher ba'Ir asher 'lo' Chomah). And "Bayis", Rav Chisda Amar Rav Ketina explains, then comes to exclude - a stone quarry and a sand-pit which are technically fields.

(d)Rebbi Meir does not preclude them - since they do not serve the purpose of a field.

(e)But as far as a regular field is concerned - Rebbi Meir concedes that "Bayis" precludes it from the Din of Batei Arei Chomah.

5)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan explains that Rebbi Yehudah (who precludes a house in the wall of the town) and Rebbi Shimon (who includes it) argue over the words "u'va'Chomah hi Yoshaves" (in the Pasuk in Yehoshua [in connection with Rachav ha'Zonah] "Ki Beisah be'Kir ha'Chomah, u'va'Chomah hi Yoshaves"), which ...

1. ... Rebbi Shimon - translates as "because Rachav was living in a walled town", whereas ...

2. ... Rebbi Yehudah explains it to mean that- she was living inside the wall of the town (but not in a walled town).

6)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that a town surrounded by houses (which form a natural wall), but not by a built one, or by one that was built after the time of Yehoshua bin Nun - does not have the Din of a walled town (regarding the Din of 'Batei Arei Chomah').

(b)The Tana defines a town as (with regard to Batei Arei Chomah) - as one that contains at least three Chatzeiros each comprising two houses.

(c)And the Tana lists 'the old Katzrah of Tzipori, Chakrah of Gush Chalav, the old Yudfas, Gamla, G'dod, Chadid and Ono' - as examples of walled towns.

(d)The other town that the Tana includes in the list is - Yerushalayim.

7)

(a)The Beraisa Darshens from "Chomah" that an outer wall formed entirely of houses is not considered a wall in this regard, and it precludes Teverya from the definition of a walled town from "Saviv", which we would otherwise have included - because its fourth side comprises the sea.

(b)Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi there learns from the fact that "lo" in the Pasuk "asher Lo Chomah" is spelt with both a 'Vav' and an 'Alef' that - any town surrounded by a wall in the days of Yehoshua is considered a walled town, even though that wall no longer exists.

(c)Abaye explains the Beraisa 'Gamla be'Galil, u'Gedud be'Eiver ha'Yardein, va'Chadid, ve'Ono vi'Yerushalayim bi'Yehudah' to mean that - all the towns up to Gamla in the Galil, G'dud in Eiver ha'Yardein, and Chadid, Ono and Yerushalayim in Yehudah were walled.

(d)Bearing in mind that the Beraisa omits some of the towns mentioned in our Mishnah, Rava explains it to mean that - all those names mentioned by the Tana, come to preclude towns elsewhere with a similar name from the Din of a walled town.

(e)And the reason that the Tana omitted the remaining towns - is because there are no other places elsewhere with the same name.

8)

(a)We query our Mishnah from a Beraisa, which states (in connection with Yerushalayim) 'Ein ha'Bayis Chalut bah' - because the Tana holds that Yerushalayim was not distributed among the tribes (in which case nobody would have owned the house in the first place).

(b)In light of that Beraisa, Rebbi Yochanan explains that our Mishnah inserts Yerushalayim - as an example of a town surrounded by a wall (even though the Dinim of Batei Arei Chomah do not pertain to it).

(c)Rav Ashi resolves the discrepancy by citing Rav Yosef who said (in Makos) that - there were two towns by the name of Kadeish, likewise there were two towns called Yerushalayim, and our Mishnah is referring to the lesser-known one.

9)

(a)Rebbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi explains the fact that our Mishnah only lists certain towns, omitting many others - by explaining that, upon their return from Bavel, they happened to find these towns, which Beis-Din then sanctified with two Todos and Shir (as we learned in Shevu'os0.

(b)The major principle that forms the basis of his opinion is - Kedushah Rishonah Kidshah le'Sha'atah ve'Lo Kidshah le'Asid Lavo (The first Kedushah of Yehoshua was sanctified for that era only, but did not extend to the era of the second Beis ha'Mikdash).

(c)The same Tana says in another Beraisa that - there were many more towns which were surrounded by walls, and that in fact, any town that is traditionally known to have been walled from the days of Yehoshua is considered a walled town, due to the principle Kedushah Rishonah Kidshah le'Sha'atah ve'Kidshah le'Asid Lavo.

(d)One possible answer is that the two Beraisos constitute two opinions in Rebbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi. Alternatively, the author of the second Beraisa is not Rebbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi, but - his brother, Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yossi ...

10)

(a)Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yossi extrapolates from the fact that the word "lo" in the Pasuk "asher lo Chomah" is written with both a 'Vav' and an 'Alef' that - any town surrounded by a wall in the days of Yehoshua is considered a walled town, even though that wall no longer exists (as we learned on the previous Amud) ...

(b)... a proof that he holds Kedushah Rishonah Kidshah le'Sha'atah ve'Kidshah le'Asid Lavo.

(c)The problem with the Pasuk in Nechemyah (in connection with the returnees from Galus Bavel) "Vaya'asu Kol ha'Kahal ... Succos ... ki Lo Asu mi'Yemei Yashu'a bin Nun" is - how it is possible that Tzadikim of the caliber of David ha'Melech would have allowed such a situation to continue without doing anything about it?

(d)We therefore explain that the Pasuk is coming to compare the advent of Ezra to that of Yehoshua (besides the resumption of Sh'mitin and Yovlos) - as regards sanctifying the walled towns and the resumption of Ma'asros ...

11)

(a)The current D'rashah is the source of those who hold Kedushah Rishonah Kidshah le'Sha'atah, ve'Lo Kidshah le'Asid Lavo.

(b)They also Darshen this from the latter part of the Pasuk "Vehevi'acha Hash-m Elokecha el ha'Aretz asher Yarshu Avosecha Viyerishtah" - which, they explain, comes to compare the second arrival in Eretz Yisrael (under Ezra) to the first (under Yehoshua), which required sanctification.

(c)Those who hold ... Kidshah le'Asid Lavo interpret the Pasuk (not as a comparison but) - as a contrast between Ezra, who prayed for the abolition of Avodah-Zarah ...

1. ... a merit which shielded over that generation like a Succah, on the one hand, and ...

2. ... Yehoshua bin Nun - on the other, who failed to do so, which is why his name is spelt there Yeshu'a without the 'Hey'.

(d)Moshe Rabeinu however, was not taken to task for not doing the same thing - because he did not have the merit of Eretz Yisrael to back him up (and he knew that his Tefilos in this area would not be answered).

(e)According to this opinion, what the Pasuk "ve'Hevi'acha Hash-m ... asher Yarshu Avosecha vi'Yerishtah" means is - since the generation of Yeshoshua had taken possession of the land, they automatically inherited it too (and it required no further sanctification).

12)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk in B'har "u'Kerasem D'ror ba'Aretz le'Chol Yoshvehah" that - Yovel applies only when all of Yisrael are living in the land.

(b)As a result of this D'rashah, they stopped observing the Yovel - when Sancheriv exiled Reuven, Gad and half of Menasheh.

(c)The problem this creates with the earlier Beraisa (that they resumed the counting of Sh'mitin and Yovlos when they returned from Bavel) is that - seeing as only forty-two thousand three hundred and sixty exiles returned from Bavel, on what grounds did they resume observing the Yovel?

(d)We also learn from "le'Chol Yoshvehah" that besides most of the inhabitants living in the land - each tribe must also be residing in its own designated location.

13)

(a)Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak solves the problem by answering that - even though the Halachos of Yovel did not apply, they nevertheless needed to count the Yovlos, for the Sh'mitin to fall at the right time (since the cycle after the forty-ninth year begins only after the Yovel [whether one observes the relevant Halachos or not] in the fifty-first year).

(b)We ask that this is fine according to the opinion of the Rabbanan as we just explained, but not according to that of Rebbi Yehudah - in whose opinion the next Sh'mitah cycle runs concurrently with the Yovel, in the fiftieth year (in which case it is unnecessary to count the Yovlos as long as they do not apply).

(c)And we conclude that - the Beraisa cannot go according to Rebbi Yehudah.