Previous daf

1)

(a) We finally establish Rebbi Akiva ('Kal va'Chomer le'Hekdesh') like Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya.
How does Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya Darshen "Shor Re'eihu"? What is the difference between a Shor Hedyot that gores a Shor Hedyot and one that gores a Shor Hekdesh?

(b) What is Rebbi Akiva now coming to add to that?

(c) We then suggest that Rebbi Akiva concedes to Rebbi Yishmael the Mazik pays with his own Ziburis (since it is the equivalent of the Nizak's Idis), and that their Machlokes is confined to Hekdesh (Rebbi Akiva holds like Rebbi Shimon ben Menasyah, and Rebbi Yishmael, like the Rabbanan ("Shor Re'eihu, ve'Lo Shor shel Hekdesh").
How do we refute this suggestion from Rebbi Akiva's very own words ...

1. ... 'Lo Ba ha'Kasuv Ela Lig'vos le'Nezikin min ha'Idis'?
2. ... 'Kal va'Chomer le'Hekdesh'?

(d) The most convincing proof however, is from the Beraisa quoted by Rav Ashi.
What does the Beraisa say (what the original Beraisa does not)?

(a) Abaye pointed out an apparent discrepancy between the Pasuk "Meitav Sadeihu ... Yeshalem" and that of "Kesef Yashiv le'Be'alav".
What do we learn from the latter Pasuk?

(b) What did Rava reply?

(c) How does Abaye refute Ula B'rei de'Rav Ila'i, who supports Rava from the Lashon "Yeshalem", which he says, implies 'Ba'al Korcho'?

(a) So Abaye resolves the discrepancy differently, based on Rabah's interpretation of a Beraisa, which speaks about someone who has houses, fields and vineyards which he is unable to sell for two hundred Zuz? What is the significance of this figure?

(b) What does the Beraisa say about someone who has houses, fields and vineyards which he is unable to sell for two hundred Zuz?

(c) Is the Tana speaking about a poor man who does not have other money with which to sustain himself, of about a rich one, who does?

(a) What do we ask on this Beraisa, assuming that ...

1. ... due to a general price slump, nobody else is able to obtain that amount either?
2. ... others are able to obtain it, but he isn't, due to the fact that he is running around trying to obtain money?

(b) Rabah established the Beraisa when the owner needed to sell the property specifically in Tishri.
What difference does it make when a person sells fields?

5)

(a) Based on Rabah's interpretation of the Beraisa, how does Abaye resolve the discrepancy between the two Pesukim ("Meitav" and "Yeshalem" ['Afilu Subin'])?

(b) What problem does Rav Acha bar Ya'akov have with Abaye's explanation?

(a) According to Rav Acha bar Ya'akov therefore, we can learn the Din of a Ba'al-Chov from the Din of Rabah (but this has nothing to do with the discrepancy between the two Pesukim).
What exactly, does he learn from Rabah?

(b) On what grounds does Rav Acha B'rei de'Rav Ika reject this explanation?

(c) What does Rav Acha B'rei de'Rav Ika himself learn from Rabah's Din?

(a) On what grounds do we reject Rava's proposal to resolve the discrepancy between the two Pesukim that whatever the Mazik pays (even if it oats), he must pay only the best quality?

(b) How do Rav Papa and Rav Huna B'rei de'Rav Yehoshua explain the distinction between Metaltelin and Karka?

(c) According to Rebbi Yishmael, who requires the Mazik to pay with the Idis of the Nizak, the explanation is clear-cut. But Rav Shmuel bar Aba from Akrunya asked Rebbi Aba whether Rebbi Akiva goes after the Mazik's Idis or that of the world.
What are the ramifications of this She'eilah?

(d) What did Rebbi Aba reply?

(a) We query Rebbi Aba from the Beraisa which discusses the various scenarios that might confront the claimants.
What are the respective claims of a Nizak, a creditor and a woman claiming her Kesuvah?

(b) It is obvious that, if the defendant only has Idis, then they all claim from Idis, and that if he has Idis, Beinonis and Ziburis, then each one claims what he is entitled to.
What do each of the three claim if he owns ...

1. ... Idis and Beinonis?
2. ... Beinonis and Ziburis?
3. ... Idis and Ziburis?

(c) How does Rebbi Aba explain the middle case ('Beinonis ve'Ziburis ... ')? If, as he maintains, we do not contend with the general public's fields (but only with the Mazik's), why should we not consider his Beinonis to be Idis, and force the creditor to take Ziburis?

Next daf