Previous daf

1)

(a) How does Rebbi Yochanan Amar Rebbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak distinguish between Hefker in front of three and Hefker in front of two?

(b) How does this enable Resh Lakish to establish even the Beraisa of 'ha'Mafkir Karmo' like Rebbi Yossi? Why might even Rebbi Yossi now agree that the owner is Patur from Ma'aser?

(c) According to this explanation 'Bifnei Sh'nayim, Lo Havei Hefker' might speak when only the owner and the Mudar are present when the owner declares the article Hefker (like the case in our Mishnah).
How else might it speak?

(a) On what grounds is this entire Sugya rejected? Why is Rebbi Yochanan's interpretation of Rebbi Yossi unacceptable?

(b) Who will then be the author of the Beraisa of ha'Mafkir Karmo'?

(c) According to Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, Hefker is effective even in front of one person.
Why then, did Chazal institute three?

(d) What is the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi (see Tosfos DH 'Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi')?

(a) Is Hefker in front of two considered Hefker, according to ...

1. ... Rebbi Yochanan?
2. ... Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi?

(b) Like whom is the Halachah?

4)

(a) According to the Tana Kama, partners who forbade each other Hana'ah are forbidden to enter each other's Chatzer.
What does Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov say?

(b) We will later establish the Machlokes by a Chatzer that is too small to divide. What will they hold in the case of a larger Chatzer?

(c) What is the basis of their Machlokes?

(a) What problem do we have with understanding the Tana Kama? Why would we think that the Neder ought not to be valid?

(b) How do we resolve this problem? On what grounds is the Neder valid?

(c) On what grounds then, does Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov disagree?

(d) What can we prove from here with regard to the owner forbidding his house on the person who is renting it from him?

(a) In Beitzah, we rule like Rav Oshaya.
What does Rav Oshaya rule with regard to B'reirah?

(b) How does this clash with our Sugya, which will later rule like Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov?

(c) Rabeinu Tam answers that when we rule like Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov, it is not for the same reason as him.
What does he mean?

(d) According to Rabeinu Tam, what will be the Halachah if the Noder specifically includes 'D'risas ha'Regel' in his Neder?

(a) On what grounds does the Ri (Rabeinu Yitzchak) refute Rabeinu Tam's answer? Why does he consider it a Dochek?

(b) So how does the Ri reconcile the two rulings? How does he explain the ruling in Beitzah like Rav Oshayah?

(c) We disagree with the Ri too however, on the basis of a major ruling of Shmuel 'ha'Achim she'Chalku Lekuchos Hein, u'Machzirin Zeh la'Zeh ba'Yovel'. What does this prove?

(a) The Rambam resolves the contradiction by differentiating between this case of B'reirah and other cases.
What is the difference between them? Why might we rule 'Yesh B'reirah' here, even though elsewhere we hold 'Ein B'reirah?

(b) What is the problem with the Rambam's explanation?

(c) We conclude that this is proper B'reirah, yet we can still rule 'Yesh B'reirah'.
Why is it ...

1. ... on the one hand, proper B'reirah?
2. ... on the other, nevertheless possible to rule like Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov, who holds 'Yesh B'reirah' even by a d'Oraysa?

(d) On what grounds then, do the Rabbanan argue with Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov?

Next daf