Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) DISPUTING THE LENGTH OF A RENTAL

(a) Version #1 - Rashi - (Rava): Reuven rented a house to Shimon for ten years; Shimon has an undated document to this effect. Reuven claims that five years have expired (Shimon says, only three) - Reuven is believed.
(b) Version #2 - Tosfos - (Rava): Reuven rented a house to Shimon for ten years; Reuven has a document saying that it was rented for 100 Dinarim for ten years, ten Dinarim per year. Five years have expired; Reuven claims that no rent was paid, Shimon says he had paid for the five years - Shimon is believed.
(c) Question (Rav Acha mi'Difti): Will we also say that if Reuven borrowed 100 Zuz with a document and says that he paid half, he is believed?!
(d) Answer (Ravina): That is different - a loan document is standing to be fully paid, if he paid half he should have written so on the document itself, or gotten a receipt;

1. Version #1 (Rashi): Here, the document was written to publicize the rental, so Shimon cannot claim that he bought the house (not that he should get ten years from when he shows the document)!
2. Version #2 (Tosfos): Here, the document was written to prevent Shimon from claiming that he bought the house (not that he owes rent for all ten years)!

(a) (Rav Nachman): Reuven asked to borrow Shimon's vessel 'b'Tuvo (in its goodness)', and Shimon consented - Reuven can borrow it forever, whenever he needs it.
(b) (Rav Mari brei d'bas Shmuel): This is if he made an acquisition - if not, (Rashi - if he returns it) he does not have permanent rights to it.
(c) (Rav Mari brei d'Rav Ashi): When it is no longer fitting to use, he returns the remnant (e.g. the handle of an axe).
(d) (Rava): Reuven asked to borrow Shimon's shovel to dig in this orchard - he may dig in that orchard;

1. If he borrowed to dig in an orchard - he may dig in any orchard he wants;
2. If he borrowed to dig in 'Pardisai' (my orchards) - he may dig in as many orchards as he has, even if he wears out the shovel.

(e) (Rav Papa): Reuven asked Shimon's 'Lend me this well (to irrigate my fields)', and it caved in - Shimon cannot say, I will rebuild it and you must let me use the new one;

1. If he asked 'Lend me a well', and it caved in - Shimon can rebuild it, and he may use it to irrigate all his fields.
2. If he asked 'Lend me place for a well', he may dig in as many places as needed until he finds water.

i. He must make an acquisition - if not, Reuven can retract his promise.

3) FOLLOWING THE LOCAL CUSTOM OF WORKERS

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven accepts to work on Shimon's field (like a sharecropper, to receive a fixed portion of the produce, or like a Choker (he rents it, on condition to pay a fixed amount of produce each year) - he follows the local customs, such as to reap (the grain, leaving the stalk) or to uproot (the entire stalk), or to plow after harvesting.
(b) They share the straw just as they share the grain; they share the vines and reeds just as they share the wine;

1. They both supply the reeds.

(c) (Gemara - Beraisa): Where the custom is to reap, he may not uproot, and vice-versa - neither the owner nor worker can deviate from the custom without the other's consent.

1. Where the custom is to reap, he may not uproot - the owner can say, I want the stalks to remain to fertilize the land; the worker may say, I do not want to toil so much;
2. Where the custom is to uprooted, he may not reap - the owner can say, I want the land to be clear; the worker may say, I need straw for my animals.

(d) Question: Why must it say 'neither can deviate without the other's consent'? (Having said that the worker cannot reap or uproot against the custom, we already know that sometimes he prefers one, sometimes the other, and likewise the owner!)
(e) Answer: The Beraisa gives the reason for the law - because sometimes each prefers one way, neither can deviate without the other's consent.
(f) (Mishnah): Where the custom is to plow after harvesting he must do so.
(g) Objection: This is obvious!
(h) Answer: We must teach for a place in which people do not weed, and this worker weeded.

1. One might have thought, he can say 'I weeded in order that I will not have to plow' - the Mishnah teaches, he cannot; rather, he must say this before weeding (Me'iri - and the owner must agree; Ramah - and the owner must not object).

(i) (Mishnah): All is according to the local custom.
(j) Question: What does this come to include?
(k) Answer (Beraisa): In a place where trees on the field are included in the rental (even though they need very little work), if nothing was specified, they are included; in a place where trees are not included, (unless specified) they are not included.
(l) Question: Obviously, in a place where trees are included, we assume they are included!
(m) Answer: The case is, the owner agreed to give the worker a larger share of the produce than normal. One might have thought, this was on condition that the trees are not included - the Beraisa teaches, this is not so, because he did not stipulate.
(n) (Beraisa): In a place where trees are not included, they are not included.
(o) Objection: This is obvious!
(p) Answer: The case is, the worker agreed to take a smaller share of the produce than normal. One might have thought, this was on condition that the trees are included - the Beraisa teaches, this is not so, because he did not stipulate.
(q) (Mishnah): They share the straw just as they share the grain.
(r) (Rav Yosef): In Bavel, the custom is that sharecroppers do not receive a portion of the straw.

1. Question: What do we learn from this?
2. Answer: If one person does so, we do not learn from him, he just happens to be generous.

(a) Version #1 (Rav Yosef): (Surrounding a field, people pile up dirt three times to make a wall around the field.) The owner supplies all the dirt, and also posts to make a fence around the field;

1. The worker supplies thorns for the fence.
2. The general rule is: the owner supplies needs of basic guarding, the worker supplies extra guarding.

(b) (Rav Yosef): The owner supplies the shovel, hoe (Rambam - ), and the bucket or pouch for irrigating; the worker makes the irrigation ditch.
(c) (Mishnah): They share the vines and reeds just as they share the wine.
(d) Question: What reeds are harvested from a vineyard?!
(e) Answer (d'vei R. Yanai): These are smoothed reeds which were used to support the vines.
(f) (Mishnah): They both supply the reeds.
(g) Objection: This is obvious (since he gets a share, surely he also supplies)!
(h) Answer: The Mishnah gives the reason - they share the vines and reeds because they both supply the reeds.

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven accepts to work on Shimon's Beis ha'Shelachin (a field that must be irrigated from a spring) or a Beis ha'Ilan (a field with a tree, which is profitable for the worker). The well dried up or the tree was cut down - if Reuven was a Choker, he does not deduct from the agreed rental;

1. If Reuven said 'Rent to me this Beis ha'Shelachin or Beis ha'Ilan', he deducts from the agreed rental.

(b) (Gemara) Question: What is the case?

1. If a big river dried up, why doesn't he deduct - this affects the entire region(and therefore cannot be considered his bad Mazal)!

(c) Answer (Rav Papa): A small spring dried up - the worker could bring from the big river.
(d) (Rav Papa): The first two Mishnayos of our Perek apply to sharecroppers and Chokerim; every other Mishnah applies to sharecroppers or Chokerim, not both.