brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
1. The Gemara discusses the conflict over the palm tree owned by a relative of Rav Idi bar Avin.
2. After Rav Chisda gave the tree to Rav Idi, Rav Idi claimed that his relative owed him the fruit that he had enjoyed.
3. If a person says that he is going to harvest another person's date tree because he bought it from him, he is believed.
4. The Gemara discusses a case of a one-witness Chazakah.
5. The Gemara compares this case (#4) to the case known as "Nascha d'Rebbi Aba" -- "The metal bar of Rebbi Aba."
A BIT MORE
1. When the relative died, the next of kin was in fact Rav Idi bar Avin. However, Rav Idi had a relative who claimed he was next of kin to the deceased, and therefore he kept the palm tree for two years until he admitted that in fact Rav Idi was next of kin.
2. Rav Chisda: The admission of the relative is like a present, as he did not have to admit he was not the closest relative. Therefore, he does not have to pay for the fruit. Abaye and Rava: The admission is tantamount to saying he stole the fruit as well. Therefore, he must compensate Rav Idi for the fruit.
3. In other words, we do not stop the claimant if we do not know that he is lying. Of course, if the owner confronts him and says that this is incorrect, the owner is believed and we do not allow the claimant to harvest the tree.
4. When confronted by the original owner, the current tenant said he had bought it from the original owner and had established a Chazakah (by being on the property for three years), but he was able to bring only one witness to support the Chazakah.
5. The case is where Reuven stole a metal bar from Shimon, and a witness testified to this fact. Reuven agreed that these were the facts, but said that it was his bar that he rightfully took back from Shimon.
Next Daf Index to Revach for Maseches Bava Basra