Previous daf

1)

(a) Karka is acquired by means of Kesef, Sh'tar and Chazakah. Chazakah involves - digging a little, walking round the borders of the field, locking it or making a breach in the fence (anything which demonstrates ownership of the land).

(b) The Tana of our Mishnah refers to Karka as 'Nechasim she'Yesh Lahem Acharayos' - because, due to their indestructability, people tend to rely on them as collateral.

(c) The direct Kinyan which the Tana of our Mishnah specifies for Metaltelin ('Nechasim she'Ein Lahem Acharayos') is - Meshichah (though Hagbahah and Mesirah [see Rav DH 've'se'Ein Lahem'] are effective too, and so is Chalipin).

(d)

1. Metaltelin require Karka - to acquire them (via Kinyan 'Metaltelin Agav Karka').
2. Karka require Metaltelin - regarding a Shevu'ah (i.e. one does not swear on Karka, unless there is also a claim on Metaltelin which requires a Shevu'ah ['Gilgul Shevu'ah']).

(a) Chizkiyah learns Kesef from the Pasuk "Sados ba'Kesef Yiknu". Despite the continuation of the Pasuk "ve'Chasov ba'Sefer ve'Chasom", we know that a Kesef acquires without a Sh'tar - because "Yiknu" appears immediately after "ba'Kesef" (rather than after "ba'Sefer").

(b) The object of the Sh'tar - is merely as a proof of sale.

(c) Rav qualifies the Din of Chazakah, which does not acquire without a Sh'tar - there where it is customary to write a Sh'tar (because the purchaser expects one before he will finalize the deal).

(d) Rav Idi bar Avin, it seems, lived in a place where it was customary to write a Sh'tar. When purchasing land, he would stipulate - that if he wanted his money to acquire (to prevent the seller from retracting in the interim), then it would; whereas if he wanted the Sh'tar to acquire (so that he would be able to retract until he received it), then it would.

(a) We cannot learn Kinyan Sh'tar by Karka from the Pasuk "ve'Chasov ba'Sefer ve'Chasom" - because that Pasuk speaks about Kinyan Kesef, and the Sh'tar is merely a proof of sale (as we just explained).

(b) The source for Chazakah by Karka is the Pasuk - "va'Ekach es Sefer ha'Miknah".

(c) Shmuel qualifies this ruling. Sh'tar alone ...

1. ... acquires - by a gift.
2. ... does not acquire on its own - by a sale, until the purchaser actually pays for his purchase, in keeping with the seller's expectations.

(a) Rav Hamnuna asks on Shmuel from a Beraisa, which writes 'Kasav Lo al ha'N'yar ... 'Sadi Mechurah Lach, Sadi Nesunah Lach, Harei Zu Mechurah u'Nesunah'. To answer this question, Rav Hamnuna himself - establishes the Beraisa by someone who is selling his field because of its poor quality, in which case he is only too happy to find a buyer, and doesn't mind waiting for the money?

(b) Rav Ashi establishes the Beraisa even by an ordinary field, and - the Tana is referring (not to two cases, but) to one case. He is speaking exclusively about someone who gave his field as a gift.

(c) The reason that he added 'Mechurah' was - in order to enable the recipient to claim the value of the field (as recorded in the Sh'tar) should his creditors claim it from the purchaser.

(d) The Machlokes between Rav Hamnuna and Rav Ashi is based on the interpretation of one word in the Beraisa. Whether 'Mechurah *u'Nesunah*' means sold *or* given as a gift (Rav Hamnuna), or 'sold *and* given as a gift'.

(a) Chizkiyah learns - Kinyan Chazakah by Karka from the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "u'Shevu be'Areichem Asher Tefastem Bah" ('Bameh Tefastem, bi'Yeshivah').

(b) According to Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, the source is the Pasuk - "vi'Yerishtem Osah vi'Yeshavtem Bah" ('Bameh Yerashtem, bi'Yeshivah').

(c) The Tana of our Mishnah might learn that Meshichah acquires Metaltelin from the Pasuk in Behar "O Kanoh mi'Yad Amisecha" ('Davar ha'Nikneh mi'Yad le'Yad'). Rebbi Yochanan learns from there - that Kesef acquires Metaltelin min ha'Torah.

(d) In that case, the source for Meshichah is - mi'de'Rabbanan (to rerplace of Kesef), for fear that the seller will allow the bought article (which already belongs to the buyer min ha'Torah) to get burned, claiming that he was not responsible. By making Meshichah, the purchaser will be encouraged to take the article away, thereby avoiding such a situation.

(a) We learn Kinyan Chazakah by Karka from the Pasuk "Vayiten Lahem Avihem Matanos ... Im Arei Metzuros bi'Yehudah" - that one acquire Metaltelin with the Kinyan that one makes on Karka.

(b) Rebbi Akiva says in a Beraisa that the minutest measure of land is Chayav Pe'ah and Bikurim. He does not include 'Viduy' (of Biy'ur Ma'asros) in the list - because, unike Bikurim, where the Torah writes "Hinei Heveisi Reishis P'ri ha'Adamah Asher Nasata *Li* Hashem), the Torah writes "u'Varech es Amcha es Yisrael ve'es ha'Adamah Asher Nasata *Lanu*, which even someone who does not own land can say.

(c) Besides P'ruzbul, he also includes - 've'Liknos Imah Nechasim she'Ein Lahem Achrayus'.

(d) We try to resolve from here the She'eilah whether the Metaltelin that one acquires together with Karka needs to actually be piled up on the land that he is acquiring (Tziburin) or not. Because if it did, what sort of Metaltelin could one possibly pile up on a minute measure of land?

7)

(a) Rav Yosef was not happy with Rav Shmuel bar Bisna - who established the case of Metaltelin Agav Karka in the above Beraisa - by someone who wished to acquire a needle. Because needles are not sufficiently valuable to warrant their insertion in the Beraisa exclusively for them.

(b) Rav Ashi explained however, that what Rav Shmuel bar Bisna meant - was that he stuck the needle in the grounds to acquire it, but that there was a jewel hanging on it, and it is because of the jewel, which could be worth a thousand Zuz, that the Tana inserts this case.

(c) The Chachamim advised that Madoni who visited Yeushalyim and who wanted to give a gift of a large consignment of Metaltelin - to purchase Karka and to be Makneh the Metaltelin together with the Karka.

(a) So he went and bought a Beis Sela near Yerushalayim. This might mean - a minute plot of land the size of a Sela coin, or it might mean a sharp pinnacle of rock.

(b) Together with the Beis-Sela, he gave the beneficiary - a hundred sheep and a hundred barrels of wine.

(c) We try and prove from there that Kinyan 'Agav' does not require the Metaltelin to be on the land - because if it did, how could he have placed all those sheep and all those barrels of wine on such a small (or sharp) piece of land?

(d) In order to refute this proof, we reinterpret 'Beis Sela' to mean - a large plot of land that was hard like a rock.

(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav cited a similar incident, where the benefactor purchased a Beis Rova of land near Yerushalayim. What we mean when we say that according to some opinions, the man was very ill *like Rebbi Elazar* is - that he was a Go'ses, and it is only according to Rebbi Elazar that a Go'ses requires a Kinyan (whereas according to the Rabanan, who hold 'Divrei Shechiv Mera ki'Chesuvin ve'chi'Mesurin Dami', no Kinyan would have been required.

(b) Like in the previous case, the man gave a hundred sheep and a hundred barrels of wine together with the plot of land. The amount of land that he gave the beneficiary together with the Metaltelin - was a Tefach square.

(c) The Chachamim - did indeed condone his actions.

(d) We try and prove from this incident too - that Kinyan Agav Karka does not require the Metaltelin to be Tziburin, just like we tried to prove in the previous case, only in the previous case we were able to interpret 'a Beis Sela' to mean 'hard like a rock', whereas here there is no alternative to way of explaining 'a Tefach square'.

(a) We reject this proof by establishing the gift, not as regular Metaltelin, but as *money* to the value of the Metaltelin, which, we attempt to prove, must be the case, because otherwise - why was the beneficiary not Makneh the gift to the benefactor with a Kinyan Chalipin (which can acquire other Metaltelin but not money, as we learn in Bava Metzi'a).

(b) We refute this proof on the grounds that, even if the gift comprised money, we will still need to understand - why he was not Makneh it with Meshichah?

(a) We therefore establish the case - when the beneficiary was not present, in which case Meshichah was not possible irrespective of whether the gift comprised money or regular Metaltelin.

(b) The reason that he was not Makneh it to the beneficiary via a third person using Meshichah is - because he had not been long in the town, and at that point, there was no-one that he trusted not to retain the money himself.

(c) In that case, what the Chachamim meant when they told the benefactor that he had no option but Kinyan Agav (despite the fact that he could have used Meshichah via a third person) was - that according to his personal prejudices, he had no option but to be Makneh to him by means of Kinyan 'Agav'.

(a) The problem that faced Raban Gamliel, who was traveling on a boat was - that he had forgotten to separate Ma'asros before leaving on what was obviously a sudden and urgent trip.

(b) It seems that he had already separated Terumah Gedolah, and he decided to give his Ma'aser Rishon to Rebbi Yehoshua. We know that Rebbi Yehoshua was a Levi - from the Sugya in Erchin which describes how, when he went to help Rebbi Yochanan ben Gudgoda to close the gates, the latter told him to desist, because singers and gatekeepers are forbidden to witch jobs. And the Sifri adds that a Levi who does so is Chayav Misah.

(c) He decided to give his Ma'aser Ani - to Rebbi Akiva, who was a Gabai Tzedakah.

(d) He was taking Ma'aser Ani and not Ma'aser Sheini - because it was the third or the sixth year of the cycle, when Ma'aser Ani replaces Ma'aser Sheini.

(a) Since the produce was not in front of them, he was Makneh these two Ma'asros to the two men - by renting them the land on which the Ma'aser was lying.

(b) He made a point of saying 'u'Mekomo Muskar Lo' (stressing that it was the land which housed the produced that he was renting to them - which we initially assume was because Metaltelin need to be Tziburin on the Karka together with which they are being acquired.

(c) We refute this proof too, however, on the grounds that he might well have used the expression 'u'Mekomo Muskar Lo' - in order to take the pressure off Rebbi Yehoshua and Rebbi Akiva to remove their produce from *his* storehouse at the earliest possible opportunity (rather than because the Metaltelin needed to be Tziburin).