Previous daf

1)

(a) If the benefactor and the beneficiary argue over whether the former was a Bari or a Shechiv-Mera when he wrote the Sh'tar, the Chachamim in our Mishnah hold 'ha'Motzi me'Chavero, Alav ha'Re'ayah'.
What does Rav Huna mean when he says 'Re'ayah be'Eidim'?

(b) What is the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim, according to him?

(c) How do Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna interpret the Chachamim's ruling?

(d) What do the Chachamim then hold, once he has substantiated the Sh'tar?
Do they hold like Rebbi Nasan or like Rebbi Ya'akov?

(a) According to the Chachamim, what is the point of the beneficiary substantiating the Sh'tar, seeing as the benefactor anyway admitted that he wrote it?

(b) And what does Rebbi Meir mean, according to Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna, when he says 'Tzarich Le'havi Re'ayah she'Shechiv-Mera Hayah'?

(c) What is then the basis of their Machlokes?

(a) The Chachamim hold in the Mishnah in Kesuvos that if witnesses substantiate their own signatures on a Sh'tar, but who then claim 'Anusim Hayinu', 'Ketanim Hayinu' or 'Pesulim Hayinu', they are believed.
Why is that?

(b) And on what grounds does Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa disagree with this?

(c) What exactly, is the basis of their Machlokes?

(d) Seeing as they already present this Machlokes once, why do they find it necessary to present it a second time? What might we have thought had ...

1. ... the Chachamim not repeated their ruling here?
2. ... Rebbi Meir not repeated his ruling there?

(a) Rabah agrees with Rav Huna, that when the Chachamim in our Mishnah say 'ha'Motzi me'Chavero, Alav ha'Re'ayah', they mean with witnesses. What did he reply when Abaye suggested that perhaps this was because the Sh'tar lacked the clause (generally contained in the Sh'tar of a Bari) stating that the benefactor was 'walking on his two feet'?

(b) Then what *is* the Chachamim's reason, according to Rabah?

(c) Rebbi Yochanan too, holds like Rav Huna, whereas Resh Lakish holds 'Re'ayah be'Kiyum ha'Sh'tar', like Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna. Rebbi Yochanan asked on Resh Lakish from a Beraisa.
When one of the heirs sold some property of the father's estate and died, what was the bone of contention between the remaining brothers and the purchaser?

(d) What did Rebbi Akiva rule when the purchasers asked for permission to examine the deceased brother's body, to ascertain that he was a Gadol when he died?

(a) Where was Rebbi Akiva when this She'eilah came before him?

(b) What was Rebbi Yochanan trying to prove from this Beraisa?

(a) How did Resh Lakish refute Rebbi Yochanan's Kashya? In whose possession was the property, and who was the claimant, according to him?

(b) How did Resh Lakish attempt to prove his point from the claimant's silence?

(c) Based on Rebbi Akiva's complete ruling, how do we repudiate that proof?

7)

(a) Resh Lakish queried Rebbi Yochanan from a Beraisa cited by bar Kapara, where Reuven claims that the field that Shimon claimed was his, really belonged to *him*.
What does the Tana rule there, when Shimon produces a Sh'tar to prove that he sold it to him or gave it to him as a gift, in the event that Reuven ...

1. ... denies having written it?
2. ... counters that it was a Sh'tar Pasim or a Sh'tar Amanah (and he had not yet paid)?

(b) What is ...

1. ... 'a Sh'tar Pasim'?
2. ... 'a Sh'tar Amanah'?

(c) Resh Lakish asked whether the author of this Beraisa was Rebbi Meir, who says 'Modeh bi'Sh'tar she'Kasvo, Ein Tzarich Le'kaymo' (in the Beraisa that we quoted earlier).
What did Rebbi Yochanan reply?

(d) And what did Rebbi Yochanan reply, when Resh Lakish quoted him (in connection with the Beraisa that we quoted a little earlier) as having justified the claim of the remaining brothers that their deceased brother had been a Katan when he sold their father's property?

(a) Rebbi Zeira asked on Rebbi Yochanan from Rebbi Yanai.
What was the relationship between Rebbi Yanai and Rebbi Yochanan?

(b) What did Rebbi Yanai quote Rebbi as saying?

(c) Rebbi Yochanan asked on Rebbi Yanai that this was already stated by our Mishnah.
To what was he referring? How does Rebbi Yochanan now interpret the 'Re'ayah' of the Chachamim?

(a) We explain Rebbi Yochanan's statement ' ... Divrei ha'Kol Eino Tzarich Le'kaymo', by citing Rav Yosef.
How does Rav Yosef Amar Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel present the Machlokes in our Mishnah between Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan?

(b) How will this help us to explain Rebbi Yochanan's statement? Why did he say 'Divrei ha'Kol, Eino Tzarich Le'kaymo', seeing as Rebbi Meir disagrees?

(c) In light of this explanation, how will we now explain a. the Beraisa, which quotes the opinions of Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan like they are quoted in our Mishnah and b. Rebbi Yochanan himself, who said earlier 'Re'ayah be'Eidim' (whilst Resh Lakish said 'Re'ayah be'Kiyum ha'Sh'tar')?

(d) Earlier on the Amud, we cited Rebbi Yochanan, who queried Resh Lakish from the Beraisa of Rebbi Akiva (that Re'ayah must mean 'Re'ayah be'Eidim'). Does this mean that we must also switch the Kashya, and that it was Resh Lakish who really queried Rebbi Yochanan?

Next daf