Question: R. Yonasan learns unlike R. Yehoshua ben Korchah above. What is his source for Shelichus regarding Kodshim?

(R. Yonasan) Question: Why does it say "all of Yisrael will slaughter (the Korban Pesach)"? Only one person slaughters it!

Answer: Rather, this teaches that all of Yisrael can be partners in one Korban Pesach (even though everyone owns less than an olive's volume).

Question: This itself shows that Shelichus works for Kodshim! The answer to question (a) is obvious!

Answer: This shows that Shelichus works only when the Shali'ach is a partner (he acts also for himself).

Answer: "Each man will take a lamb for his household".

Question: Perhaps there also, Shelichus works only because the Shali'ach is a partner!

Answer: Since the previous verse teaches that a partner can be a Shali'ach, this verse teaches that even one who is not a partner can be a Shali'ach.

Question: We need the latter verse for R. Yitzchak's law!

(R. Yitzchak): A man can acquire on behalf of others, but a minor cannot.

Answer: We learn R. Yitzchak's law from "(you will appoint on the lamb) a man according to his eating".

Question: We need this last verse to teach that we may slaughter a Korban Pesach for an individual (to eat it all himself)!

Answer: R. Yonasan holds that we do not slaughter for an individual (lest he not be able to finish it).

(Rav Gidal): "One Nasi (for each Shevet will acquire a portion of Eretz Yisrael for his Shevet)" this teaches that a Shali'ach can act on behalf of others.

Question: Why do we need the other verses for Shelichus?

Counter-question: The Nesi'im could not have been Sheluchim. They acquired also on behalf of minors, who cannot make Sheluchim!

Correction (Rava bar Rav Huna citing Rav Gidal): Rather, "one Nasi" teaches that Reuven can acquire to benefit Shimon, even when Shimon is not here.

Objection: This cannot be! The acquisition of shares of Eretz Yisrael was not beneficial for everyone. Some people prefer land in the valley, and others prefer in the mountain!

Correction (Rava bar Rav Huna citing Rav Gidal): Rather, "one Nasi" teaches that if orphans come to divide their inheritance, Beis Din appoints a guardian for them for their benefit and detriment.

Objection: Why should we appoint someone for their detriment?!

Answer: He means that the guardian is empowered to do things that may have a detrimental result, if their intention is to benefit the orphans.

(Rav Nachman citing Shmuel): If orphans come to divide their father's property, Beis Din appoints a guardian for them and select a nice portion for them. When the orphans grow up, they can demand a new division;

(Rav Nachman himself): They cannot demand a new division. If they could, Beis Din would be weak!

Question: Elsewhere Rav Nachman is not concerned for the power of Beis Din!

(Mishnah): If Beis Din assessed property (to sell to feed orphans or a widow) for a sixth more or less than the actual value, the sale is void;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, the sale stands. If it were void, Beis Din would be weak!

(Rav Nachman): The Halachah follows Chachamim.

Answer: Rav Nachman is concerned for the power of Beis Din only when they did not err.

Question: If they did not err, why can the orphans protest (according to Shmuel)?

Answer: (They did not err about the value.) They erred about location. (E.g. an orphan received a portion far from property that he inherited from his mother's father.)

(Rav Nachman): If brothers divided an inheritance and erred, i.e. some brothers received too much and others too little, the law is like that of buyers. If the mistake was less than a sixth of the value, the sale (division) stands;

If the mistake was more than a sixth, the sale is invalid;

If the mistake was exactly a sixth, the sale is valid, but whoever got too little is compensated.

(Rava): Rav Nachman's laws apply only in the following situations:

When the mistake was less than a sixth of the value, the sale stands. This is when they acted for themselves;

If a Shali'ach acted for them, the sale is invalid. The Shali'ach was appointed only to help them!

Version #1 (Rashi): If the mistake was more than a sixth, the sale is invalid. This is when they did not say 'let us divide like Beis Din.' If they said this, the division stands (like R. Shimon ben Gamliel);

(Mishnah): If Beis Din appraised property (and sold it) and erred, a sixth above or below the true value, the sale is invalid;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, the sale stands.

If the mistake was exactly a sixth, the sale is valid, but there is compensation. This refers only to Metaltelim;

The law of Ona'ah (compensating one who received too little) does not apply to land.

Ona'ah does not apply to land only when they erred about the value. There is compensation for a mistake in measurement of any size.

Version #2 (Tosfos): If the mistake was exactly a sixth, the sale is valid, but there is compensation. This is when they did not say 'let us divide like Beis Din.' If they said this, the division is void (like Chachamim);

(Mishnah): If Beis Din appraised property (and sold it) and erred, a sixth above or below the true value, the sale is invalid;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, the sale stands.

If the mistake was more than a sixth, the sale is invalid. This applies only to Metaltelim;

Ona'ah does not apply to land (to invalidate the sale);

Ona'ah does not apply to land when they erred about the value. Even a small mistake in measurement invalidates the sale.

(Mishnah): If one sent a Cheresh (deaf-mute), lunatic or minor with a fire, and they cause damage, the sender is exempt b'Yedei Adam (Beis Din cannot make him pay), but he is liable b'Yedei Shamayim;

If he sent a proper adult, the adult is liable.

Question: Why don't we attribute the Shali'ach's action to the sender?

Answer: We do not say so about a Shali'ach to transgress. The Shali'ach should have obeyed Hash-m, not the one who sent him! (His authorization was invalid.)

(Beraisa): If Reuven sent Shimon to buy something, and he gave to him Hekdesh money, if Shimon deviated from his mission, he transgressed Me'ilah;

If he fulfilled his mission, Reuven transgressed Me'ilah.

Question: How does Reuven transgress through his Shali'ach? We should say that the Shelichus is invalid!

Answer: Me'ilah is an exception. We learn from a Gezeirah Shavah "Chet-Chet" from Terumah;

Just like one can make a Shali'ach for Terumah, also for Me'ilah.

Question: Why don't we learn from Me'ilah to other Aveiros?

Answer #1: Me'ilah and Shelichus Yad (unauthorized use of a deposit) are Shnei Kesuvim, therefore, we do not learn to other cases.

(Beraisa - Beis Shamai): "For any Devar (matter of) transgression" obligates a Shomer (to pay for any loss to the deposit) if he intended to be Shole'ach Yad.

Beis Hillel say, he is not liable until he uses it - "if he was not Shole'ach Yad (he may swear to exempt himself)".

Beis Shamai: How do you expound "for any Davar of transgression"?

Beis Hillel: One might have thought that the watchman is liable only if he himself used the deposit. "For any Davar" teaches that even if he told his slave or Shali'ach to use it, he is liable.

Question: This answer is according to Beis Hillel. Why don't Beis Shamai learn to other sins?