Previous daf

1)

(a) Still in connection with Rebbi Shimon, what does Rava say about 'Gazal ve'Hishbi'ach u'Machar, Gazal ve'Hishbi'ach ve'Horish'?

(b) How might he be speaking even not according to Rebbi Shimon?

(c) What does Rava conclude with regard to a case where the purchaser from a Ganav improved the field?

(a) Rava asked what the Din will be if a Nochri improved the field (whether the Din of Mechtzah ... will pertain to him, too).
What did Rav Acha mi'Difti ask Ravina in surprise when he heard the She'eilah?

(b) On what grounds did he even object when Ravina tried to establish the case when the Nochri stole the field, improved it, and then sold the field to a Jew?

(c) So how does Ravina finally establish Rava's She'eilah?

(d) What is the She'eilah, and what is its outcome?

(a) Why might we have thought that if Reuven steals Shimon's date-palm, cuts it down and moves it to his domain, he will acquire it (and may compensate the owner with cash)?

(b) What does Rav Papa actually say about such a case?

(c) Is someone Koneh with Shinuy, if he steals and cuts up ...

1. ... a date-palm into logs?
2. ... logs into beams
3. ... large beams into small ones?
4. ... beams into planks?

(a) What does Rava say about someone who steals ...

1. ... a Lulav-branch and pulls out the leaves?
2. ... Lulav-leaves out of which he makes a broom?
3. ... a broom made of Lulav-leaves and makes a rope?

(b) What is the basic difference between the two previous cases?

(a) Rav Papa asks what the Din will be if the Teyomes splits.
What is 'a Teyomes'?

(b) What is the She'eilah?

(c) On what grounds do we refute the proof from Rebbi Masun Amar Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, who says that a Lulav whose Teyomes is removed is Pasul?

(d) In the second Lashon, the proof is clear-cut.
What does Rebbi Masun Amar Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi say in the second Lashon?

6)

(a) What distinction does Rav Papa make between someone who steals ...

1. ... dust and makes bricks out of them and someone who steals a brick and grinds it into dust?
2. ... a piece of silver and mints it into a coin and someone who steals a coin and melts it into silver?

(b) If, as Rav Papa says, someone who steals old clothes and bleaches them white, he is not Koneh them because they can be sullied again, then why, in the reverse case, is he Koneh? Surely there too, he can bleach them again?

(a) We learned in our Mishnah 'Zeh ha'K'lal, Kol ha'Gazlanim Meshalmin ke'Sha'as ha'Gezeilah'. This come to include what Rebbi Ila'a said.
What did Rebbi Ila'a say?

(b) What are the immediate ramifications of this ruling (besides the fact that the Ganav is not obligated to return the animal, even if he did not sell or Shecht it)?

(c) What did Rav Nachman rule when the case where Reuven stole a pair of oxen and plowed with them and sowed with them before returning them to Shimon, came before him?

(a) What did Rava mean when he asked Rav Nachman 'Turi Ashbach, Ar'a Lo Ashbach'?

(b) What did Rav Nachman reply?

(c) What did Rav Huna say about Rav Nachman when he sat in judgment? Who is Shavur Malka (in this context)?

(d) How did Rav Nachman answer Rava's Kashya from 'Kol ha'Gazlanim Meshalmin ke'Sha'as ha'Gezeilah', in which case, Reuven ought to have taken all the Sh'vach?

(a) We have already discussed the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim with regard to 'Gazal Beheimah ve'Hizkiynah, Avadim ve'Hizkiynu'. The Chachamim rule in both cases 'Meshalem ke'Sha'as ha'Gezeilah'.
Why does Rebbi Meir ...

1. ... agree with the Rabbanan in the case of Beheimah?
2. ... argue with them in the case of Avadim?

(b) What does the Tana rule in the case of ...

1. ... 'Gazal Matbei'a ve'Nisdak, Peyros ve'Hirkivu, Yayin ve'Hichmitz'?
2. ... 'Gazal Matbei'a ve'Nifsal, Terumah ve'Nitma'as, Chametz ve'Avar Alav ha'Pesach'?

(c) What is the basis for the difference between the two rulings?

(d) What will be the Din if the animal which the Ganav stole is then used for sinful purposes, if it became disqualified from the Mizbe'ach or if it was actually being taken out to be stoned?

(a) Rav Papa interprets 'Hizkiynah' in our Mishnah to be 'La'av Dafka'. The Tana is also referring to 'Kachshah'.
Then why did the Tana say Hizkiynah' and not 'Kachshah'?

(b) What did Rav Ashi comment when Mar Keshisha B'rei de'Rav Chisda quoted *Rebbi Yochanan* as saying that if the Ganav stole a lamb and it grew into a sheep ... he acquires it?

(c) Why did Rav rule like Rebbi Meir in our Mishnah, even though he is a minority opinion?

(d) We ask why he opted to switch the opinions of the Mishnah on account of the Beraisa, and not vice-versa, and we give two answers, one of them, that he actually learned the opinions in our Mishnah the other way round too.
What is the second answer?

(a) The Tana in the Beraisa says '*ha'Mocher* Shifchah', but '*ha'Machlif* Parah ba'Chamor'. Why does he not say ...

1. ... 'ha'Mocher Parah' (like he says by Shifchah)?
2. ... 'ha'Moshech Parah'?

(b) What does he rule in a case where the cow or the Shifchah gave birth, and the original owner of the cow or of the Shifchah claim that the baby was born whilst the mother was still in his domain, whereas the recipient doesn't know?

(c) What is the reason for this ruling?

(d) And what does the Tana rule in a case where both litigants don't know when the baby was born?

(a) If each litigant claims that the baby was born in his domain, the seller of the Shifchsah must swear that it was born in his domain.
Why specifically the seller?

(b) What makes this a Shevu'ah d'Oraysa?

(c) If the defendant offers to pay the article that he admits he owes intact, this is known as 'Heilech' and he is Patur from a Shevu'ah.
In that case, seeing as the seller offers to give the purchaser the Shifchah, why is this not a case of Heilech?

(d) This is the opinion of Rebbi Meir.
What do the Chachamim say in the case of the Shifchah?

Next daf