Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) WHO GETS A CHAZAKAH

(a) Some say that an (Arev) Kablan (the lender may collect from the Kablan even before trying to collect from the borrower) can testify about land of the borrower, others say that he cannot.

1. Some say that he can testify, just like a regular Arev (when the borrower has other land - even if the Arev's land is taken, he will be paid back from the other land);
2. Some say that he cannot testify, he prefers that he have two lands from which the lender can collect (Rashbam - e.g., when the disputed land is Beinonis and the other land is Ziburis, for then the lender is more inclined to collect from the borrower; Tosfos - when the borrower has more land, the lender is more inclined to collect from the borrower, saving the Kablan the toil of paying and collecting from the borrower.

(b) (R. Yochanan): A craftsman does not get a Chazakah, but his son does;

1. A sharecropper does not get a Chazakah, but his son does;
2. A robber does not get a Chazakah, nor does his son, but his grandson does.

(c) Question: What is the case?

1. If the children (or grandchild) claim that they received the property from their father, they should not get a Chazakah either!
2. If they claim that they themselves bought the property, a robber's son should also get a Chazakah!

(d) Version #1 - Rashbam - Answer: The case is, the original owner admitted in front of witnesses to their father that their father owns it;
(e) Version #2 - Tosfos - Answer: The case is, the son says that he saw the original owner admit to his father; (end of Version #2)

1. Regarding a craftsman or sharecropper, we believe the admission; regarding a robber, we do not, as Rav Kahana taught.
2. (Rav Kahana): The owner admitted to the robber because he feared what the robber might do to him and his property.

(f) Version #1 (Rava): Sometimes even a robber's grandson does not get a Chazakah, e.g. when he claims that he received the property from his grandfather.
(g) Version #2 (Rava): Sometimes a robber's son gets a Chazakah, e.g. when he claims that he received the property from his grandfather.
(h) Question: What is the case of a robber?
(i) Answer #1 (R. Yochanan): One who is established that he is on another's field without permission (he can never make a Chazakah on that field).
(j) Answer #2 (Rav Chisda): Someone in a family of people who kill people on account of money.
(k) (Beraisa): A craftsman gets no Chazakah; after he ceases his trade, he gets a Chazakah;

1. A sharecropper gets no Chazakah; after he ceases to be a sharecropper, he gets a Chazakah.

(l) A son that is not supported by his father and a divorcee are like strangers (he/she can make a Chazakah in the property of the father/ex-husband).
(m) Question: We understand why we must teach about the son - one might have thought, the father owns it but he does not protest to his son's usage - rather, the Beraisa teaches that the son gets a Chazakah;

1. But obviously, a divorcee gets a Chazakah (her ex-husband would not pardon her usage)!

(n) Answer: The case is, she is divorced and not divorced (i.e. doubtfully divorced);

1. (R. Zeira): Everywhere that Chachamim said that a woman is divorced and not divorced, her husband must feed her. (One might have thought that he allows her to take her food from his property, therefore he did not protest - the Beraisa teaches, this is not so).

(a) (Rav Nachman): Normally, anyone who brings a proof (e.g. document) of ownership, we accept it and establish him to be the owner;

1. If a robber brings a proof, we do not accept it, we do not establish him to be the owner.

(b) Question: A Mishnah teaches this!

1. (Mishnah): Reuven bought a field from a Sikrikon (extortionist), then bought it from the real owner (Shimon), his purchase is void (Shimon only agreed to sell because he fears the Sikrikon).

(c) Answer: Rav Nachman teaches that the Halachah does not follow Rav.

1. (Rav): The Mishnah is when Shimon told Reuven to acquire through Chazakah, but if Shimon wrote a document, Reuven acquires.
2. Rather, the Halachah follows Shmuel.

i. (Shmuel): Even if Shimon wrote a document, Reuven does not acquire unless Shimon wrote in the document that he accepts Acharayos (to compensate him if the land is legally taken from him).

(d) (Rav Bivi citing Rav Nachman): If a robber brings a proof, we do not establish him to own the land, but he gets back the money he paid.

1. This is only if witnesses testify (or if it is written in the document) that the robber paid the money;
2. If they only saw the owner admit that he was paid, the robber does not get his money, as Rav Kahana taught;

i. (Rav Kahana): The owner admitted to the robber because he feared what the robber might do to him and his property.