Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rebbi Meir in our Mishnah 'ha'Noder min ha'Bayis, Mutar ba'Aliyah'. The Chachamim maintain - that a Neder on a house incorporates the attic.

(b) Someone who is Noder min ha'Aliyah - is permitted to live in the house, according to everyone.

(c) The Beraisa Darshens from the Pasuk in Tazri'a "*be*'Veis Eretz Achuzaschem" (with regard to Tzara'as on the house) to include the attic. Rav Chisda establishes the Beraisa like Rebbi Meir - because, according to the Chachamim, who hold that a 'house' automatically incorporates the attic, we should not need a Pasuk to teach us that.

(d) Abaye disagrees, based on the Pasuk "be'Veis Eretz *Achuzaschem*" - which seems to imply that the house must be attached to the ground (which the attic is not). Consequently, even the Rabbanan will agree that a special Pasuk is required to teach us otherwise.

(a) The Tana also Darshens "be'Veis", 'Lerabos es ha'Yatzi'a' (the gallery or the extension). We reject this text however - on the basis of a Tosefta, which Darshens exactly the opposite from the Pasuk "be'Kiros ha'Bayis" 've'Lo be'Kiros ha'Yatzi'a'.

(b) We change it to 'Lerabos es ha'Tzvu'a' (a painted room), which we would otherwise have precluded from the Dinim of Tzara'as - because we would have compared a house with Tzara'as to a garment with Tzara'as (and a colored garment is not subject to Tzara'as).

(a) Rav Huna bar Chiya said in the name of Ula 'Bayis be'Veisi Ani Mocher Lach, Mar'eihu Aliyah', from which we can infer - that if he had said S'tam Bayis, he could not force the buyer to accept the attic.

(b) We suggest that Ula's statement follows the opinion of Rebbi Meir, who holds that 'a house' does not incorporate the attic. In order to establish the Beraisa even like the Rabbanan - we would have to explain 'Aliyah' to mean 'Me'uleh she'be'Batim' (meaning that it is the purchaser who has the upper-hand, because 'Bayis she'be'Batim' implies a good-quality house or room.

(c) According to our initial understanding of the Beraisa - the buyer cannot argue that he bought a house, and not an attic - because (based on the principle 'ha'Motzi me'Chaveiro, Alav ha'Re'ayah') the purchaser always has the underhand.

(d) The Sugya in Menachos concludes like our initial understand of the Ula's statement, in which case, the Halachah ought to be like Rebbi Meir. Nevertheless, the Ramban establishes the Halachah like the Chachamim - because the Sugya in Menachos does not agree with the inference that we made from Ula's statement. In fact, what Ula meant, when he said 'Bayis be'Veisi', is that even in there, the seller may force the purchaser to accept an attic, and it is obvious that that will be the Din in a regular case of Bayis S'tam.

(a) 'Rebbi Meir Omer ha'Noder min ha'Mitah, Mutar be'Dargesh' - va'Chachamim Omrim, Dargesh bi'Chelal Mitah.

(b) If he is Noder min ha'Dargesh however - everyone agrees that beds are not included.

(c) When the people came to participate in the Se'udas Havra'ah (the first meal that one serves an Aveil) of the King who became an Aveil - they would sit on the floor, whilst he sat on a Dargesh.

(d) We initially try to prove from this Mishnah too, that a Dargesh cannot be a bed that was made for good Mazel, but not to sleep on, because if it was - why should the King sit on a surface which he did not sit on the whole year round?

(a) We refute the previous Kashya however, on the grounds that one also serves an Aveil meat and wine, even though he may well not partake of them the whole year round. So we try to disprove our initial suggestion from the Beraisa which requires the Dargesh to be stood upright, but not overturned. Now if, as we currently believe, a Dargesh is a bed that is made for good Mazel - why should it be different than any other bed, about which the Beraisa says 'Ela Kol Mitos she'Yesh Lo ba'Bayis Hu Kofeh'?

(b) This too is not a problem however, because we have a precedent of other beds that are exceptions to the rule, and which do not need to be overturned - such as beds which are designated for vessels (see Rosh DH 'Midi de'Hava').

(c) We finally refute the current explanation from another Beraisa, where Raban Shimon ben Gamliel says 'Dargesh Matir Karbitav ('its loops'), ve'Hu Nofel me'Eilav' - and a Dargesh does not have loops.

(d) Both the Chachamim and Raban Shimon ben Gamliel agree that a Dargesh does not need to be overturned - because, unlike a bed, its posts do not protrude above the height of the frame, in which case, overturning it would cause the leather mattress to become dirty.

6)

(a) We have proved that a Dargesh is not a bed that is designated for Mazel - so Ravin quoting Rav Tachlifa bar Ma'arva defines it as a tanner's bed or sofa.

(b) Ravin was certain that Rav Tachlifa bar Ma'arva was right - because he often frequented the tanner's market.

(c) Rebbi Yirmiyah initially thinks that they tied the leather mattress to the bed by winding its straps round the poles of the frame in opposite directions and then tying them together. In that case - they would have tied the mattress to the Dargesh by pushing the straps through the narrow holes in the poles and then tying them together with a bow.

(a) According to the Beraisa, wooden beds and babies-cribs become subject to Tum'ah - as soon as they have been rubbed smooth with the skin of fish (the olden-day equivalent of sand-paper).

(b) This disproves Rebbi Yirmiyah's theory that one ties the mattress to the bed by winding the straps around the poles of the frame - because if that was so, why would it be necessary to smoothen the poles, seeing as they would be covered anyway.

(c) So we are forced to conclude that the mattress of a bed, like that of a Dargesh, was attached to the frame by pushing the straps through holes in the posts and tying them with a bow. What distinguishes a Dargesh from a bed (besides the different heights of the bed-posts) - is that the former had loops which were pre-attached to its poles, and to which he tied the straps of the mattress.

(d) Finally, Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi rules that with regard to ...

1. ... a Dargesh - one simply unties the knots and lets it fall, like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel.
2. ... a two-poster bed, which cannot be overturned - must be stood upright.

(a) We have learned in our Mishnah 'ha'Noder min ha'Ir, Mutar Likaneis li'Techumah shel Ir, ve'Asur Likaneis le'Iburah'. The definition of ...

1. ... 'T'chumah shel Ir' - is the two thousand Amos surrounding it (beyond the Ibur).
2. ... 'Iburah shel Ir' - is the first seventy Amos immediately outside its walls.

(b) The Tana continues 'Aval ha'Noder min ha'Bayis, Asur min ha'Egef ve'Lifnim' - meaning that a house or room incorporates the space taken up by the door (when the door is open).

(a) Rebbi Yochanan derives from the Pasuk "Vayehi bi'Heyos Yehoshua bi'Yericho ... ", that the Ibur of the city is considered part of the city - because otherwise, in view of the Pasuk there "vi'Yericho Sogeres u'Mesugeres" (rendering it inaccessible), the first Pasuk would make no sense, seeing as Yehoshua could not possibly have been inside Yericho.

(b) We know that this Pasuk refers to the Ibur and not to the T'chum - because another Pasuk (with reference to the T'chum) writes "u'Madosem mi'Chutz la'Ir".

(a) With regard to the Kohen locking up a house which has signs of Tzara'as, the Torah writes "ve'Yatza ha'Kohen min ha'Bayis". We know that this does not mean that he must (or that he may) go home and close it from there - because the Torah also writes there "el Pesach ha'Bayis".

(b) He would do that - with the help of a long ball of string, one end of which would be tied to the door of the stricken house.

(c) We then learn from " ...min ha'Bayis" - that the Kohen must leave the jamb of the door (i.e. the lintel, even the section that is beyond the point where the door closes), before closing the door of the house.

(d) If the Kohen went home before shutting the house, or if he did so whilst standing underneath the lintel, he has nevertheless performed his duty Bedieved.

(a) We reconcile the fact that Lechatchilah the Kohen must leave the entire door-jamb, even the section that is beyond the closed door, with what we just learned (that *that* section is no longer considered part of the house - by pointing to the redundant words ("min ha'Bayis"), from which we learn that the Kohen must leave the entire lintel (even though the outer section is not really part of the house).

(b) If someone makes a Neder to stand in a house - he will not fulfill his Neder if he stands beneath the outer section of the lintel (beyond the point where the door closes).