Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) CAN ONE MAKDISH WHAT IS NOT IN HIS DOMAIN?

(a) (R. Yochanan): Something was stolen, the owner did not despair - neither the thief nor owner can make it Hekdesh;

1. The thief cannot, for it is not his; the owner cannot, for it is not in his domain!

(b) Question: But R. Yochanan said that the law is as an anonymous Mishnah!

1. (Mishnah): People used to mark off Revai (fourth-year produce) with clods off earth.

i. This was a sign: just as we can benefit from earth, also from this produce (after redeeming it).

2. They would mark off Orlah (produce in the first 3 years) with pottery shards.

i. This was a sign: just as shards give no benefit, also this produce.

3. Graves were marked off with limestone, as a sign of bones, which are also white.
4. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, this is only in Shemitah, when people are allowed to enter others' fields - but in other years, one who enters another's field is a thief - we do not care if he steals the forbidden food!
5. The Tzenu'im would take coins and say 'Whatever (Revai) was gathered from my field is redeemed on these coins.' (Even though it is not in their domain, they can redeem it - also, one can make Hekdesh something not in his domain!)
6. Suggestion: Perhaps Tzenu'im hold as R. Shimon ben Gamliel; R. Yochanan holds as Chachamim.
7. Rejection: Rabah bar bar Chanah cited R. Yochanan to say that wherever R. Shimon ben Gamliel appears in the Mishnah, the law is as him, except for (3 Mishnayos, the ones of) a guarantor, the case in Tzidon, and one who later finds a proof.

(c) Answer #1: The text of the Mishnah should say 'Whatever will be gathered from my field is redeemed on these coins.'
(d) Question: But R. Yochanan said that Tzenu'im and R. Dosa hold as each other, and he holds as the text 'was gathered'!

1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): In the morning, the owner says 'What the poor will gather today (in error, thinking they are entitled to it) is (now) Hefker';
2. R. Dosa says, at evening he says 'What the poor gathered is Hefker'.

(e) Answer #1: We must switch the opinions of R. Yehudah and R. Dosa.
(f) Question: It is better to switch the words of R. Yochanan, and say that he meant that Tzenu'im and R. Yehudah hold as each other!
(g) Answer: In any case, the Beraisa must be switched - as it stands, R. Yehudah holds of Breirah (making transactions conditional on future events) - and we know that he does not hold of Breirah!

2) BREIRAH

(a) (Mishnah - R. Meir): One who buys wine from Kusim (and is not able to separate the tithes before drinking) says: The 2 Lugim that I will later separate should be Terumah; 10 Lugim (that I will separate) - Ma'aser Rishon; 9 Lugim - Ma'aser Sheni. He (Rashi -redeems the Ma'aser Sheni and) may drink immediately;

1. R. Yehudah, R. Yosi and R. Shimon say, he must separate the tithes before drinking.

(b) Question: Even after switching the Beraisa, R. Yochanan still contradicts himself!

1. Since R. Yochanan changed the text to read 'that will be gathered', he holds of Breirah;
2. (Rav Asi citing R. Yochanan): Brothers that divide an inheritance are as buyers (we do not know which share each inherits; whatever each takes is as a purchase, in place of what his brother took from him), so they must redivide in Yovel (when all sold land reverts to the seller).

(c) Answer #2 (to question 1:b above): Really, R. Yochanan leaves the text 'was gathered'; he holds as an anonymous Mishnah that argues on the Mishnah of Tzenu'im.

1. (Mishnah): One who steals from a thief does not pay double; if he then slaughters or sells it, he does not pay 4 and 5.
2. We understand why he doesn't pay double to the first thief - "And was stolen from the man's house", not from the house of the thief;
3. Question: Why doesn't he pay double to the owner?
4. Answer: He doesn't pay the thief, for it is not his; he doesn't pay the owner, for it is not in his domain. (For the same reason, neither can make it Hekdesh.)

(d) Question: Why does R. Yochanan hold as this Mishnah, rather than the Mishnah of Tzenu'im?
(e) Answer: For a verse supports it - ""A man that will make his house Hekdesh" - just as his house is in his domain, he can only make things in his domain Hekdesh.

(a) Abaye: I would have said differently than R. Yochanan - Tzenu'im hold of R. Dosa, R. Dosa does not hold as Tzenu'im!

1. Tzenu'im hold of R. Dosa - if Chachamim made an enactment for thieves (so they will not eat Revai), all the more so for the poor!
2. R. Dosa does not hold as Tzenu'im - Chachamim made an enactment for the poor, but not for thieves.

(b) Rava: I would have said differently than R. Yochanan - Tzenu'im hold as R. Meir.

1. R. Meir says that Ma'aser Sheni is as Hash-m's money - but regarding redemption, it is considered a person's money;
2. "If a man will redeem his Ma'aser, he will add its fifth" - the Torah calls it his Ma'aser, and he adds a fifth;

i. The same applies to Revai of grapes - we learn a Gezeirah Shavah "Kodesh-Kodesh" from Ma'aser!
ii. Just as by Ma'aser, it is as Hash-m's money, but regarding redemption, it is considered a person's money - also by Revai.

3. But when the poor take what they (mistakenly) think is Leket (dropped sheaves) - that is the owner's money, he cannot redeem it when it is not in his domain. (So Tzenu'im need not hold as R. Dosa.)

(c) Ravina: R. Yochanan should have said that R. Dosa is the Tana of the Mishnah of Tzenu'im;

1. This would answer why he holds as the other Mishnah, not as Tzenu'im, because the anonymous Mishnah of Tzenu'im is as a particular Tana!