Previous daf

1)

(a) In a case where Reuven sells Shimon a Beis Kur 'be'Simanav u'vi'Metzarav', our Mishnah rules Pachos mi'Shetus Higi'o, ad Sh'tus Yenakeh'.
How many Kabin comprise a sixth, in a field of a Kur?

(b) What is the reason for this?

(c) Why can this ruling have nothing to do with the Din of Ona'ah?

(d) Then what is its source?

(a) What does the Seifa of the Mishnah 'ad Sh'tus Yenakeh' mean?

(b) Rav Huna says 'Sh'tus ke'Pachos mi'Sh'tus', and the purchaser must accept the sale.
What does Rav Yehudah say?

(c) Based on the Seifa of the Mishnah, what is the basis of their Machlokes?

(a) The Beraisa repeats the Lashon of our Mishnah, but adds (' ... O Hosir Sh'tus, Harei Hu ke'Shum ha'Dayanim'), before the word 'Higi'o'.
What is the Din regarding Beis-Din who erred by exactly a sixth?

(b) Why does this pose a Kashya on Rav Huna?

(c) How does Rav Huna counter the above Kashya against him from the word 'Higi'o'?

(d) So how does Rav Huna explain the Beraisa? Who must be the author, according to him?

(a) How has the Kashya on Rav Huna now turned into a Kashya on Rav Yehudah?

(b) Rav Yehudah however, counters this by re-establishing the author of the Beraisa as the Chachamim of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel).
How does he then ...

1. ... interpret 'ke'Shum ha'Dayanim'?
2. ... qualify 'ke'Shum ha'Dayanim'?

(c) Alternatively, we might interpret 'Ela ke'Shum ha'Dayanim ve'Lo ke'Shum ha'Dayanim' according to Rav Huna (who is pointing out that if Sh'tus ke'Yoser mi'Shetus, like the Makshan asked, then the Tana should have said 'Yenakeh', and not 'Higi'o', like we explained).
In what respect does the Tana then say 'ke'Shum ha'Dayanim'?

5)

(a) A man told Rav Papa, that the field he was selling him measured twenty Sa'ah.
What were the actual measurements of the field?

(b) What did Abaye rule in that case?

(c) Considering that the discrepancy was more than a sixth, in what way did this case differ from 'be'Simanav u'vi'Metzarav' in our Mishnah?

(a) On what grounds did Rav Papa query Abaye's ruling? How did he interpret the owner's assurance that it measured twenty Sa'ah?

(b) On what grounds did Abaye overrule his objection?

(a) If brothers divide their inheritance by drawing lots, is it then necessary to then make a Kinyan in order to actually acquire their respective portions? Why is that?

(b) Rebbi Yossi says in a Beraisa 'ha'Achin she'Chalku, Keyvan she'Alah Goral le'Echad Meihen, Kanu Kulam'.
How do the brothers plan to apportion the property?

(c) What does Rebbi Yossi mean, assuming that there were ...

1. ... only two brothers to begin with?
2. ... three brothers to begin with?

(d) What are the ramifications of this ruling? What do the lots drawn by the first brother achieve?

(a) Which source does Rebbi Elazar cite for Rebbi Yossi's ruling?

(b) What additional procedure was required to inherit Eretz Yisrael?

(c) In that case, seeing as our source is the inheritance of Eretz Yisrael, why are they not required by brothers or partners dividing their land?

(a) According to Rav, if a third brother arrives from overseas after the first two brothers have divided their inheritance of Karka, the original division is considered invalid, and they divide their property afresh. Why is the Din here different than the previous ruling (where as soon as the first brother acquires his portion, the remaining brothers automatically acquire theirs?

(b) What does Shmuel say?

(a) Rava remarked to Rav Nachman that Rav holds Hadar Dina.
What does 'Hadar Dina' mean?

(b) Why does it not then follow, he asked him, that if two out of three brothers went and divided the joint property into three portions in front of Beis-Din, that the division is also considered invalid.
What was Rav Nachman's reply?

(c) What sort of Beis-Din are we talking about?

(a) Rav Papa remarked to Abaye that Shmuel, who rules 'Mekamtzin', holds Kam Dina.
What does 'Kam Dina' mean?

(b) How does this seem to clash with Shmuel's other ruling (discussed earlier) 'Kur bi'Sheloshim Ani Mocher Lach, Yachol la'Chezor Bo Afilu be'Sa'ah Acharonah'?

(c) How do we reconcile that ruling with Shmuel's current one? What is Shmuel's reasoning there?

(a) Then why did Shmuel conclude 'Kur bi'Sheloshim Sa'ah be'Sela Ani Mocher Lach, Rishon Rishon Kanah'?

(b) Still, why does Shmuel's basic S'vara in the Reisha there not apply here by the division of the brothers?

Next daf