POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Bava Basra 24
BAVA BASRA 20-25 - sponsored by Harav Ari Bergmann of Lawrence,
N.Y., out of love for the Torah and for those who study it.
1) FOLLOWING THE MAJORITY
(a) Support (for R. Chanina - Abaye - Mishnah): Blood found
in the Prozdor (outer chamber of the womb), we are in
doubt where it came from, we assume it came from the
Makor (inner chamber), and she is Tamei;
1. Even though the Aliyah (upper chamber) is closer, we
attribute it to the Prozdor because more blood comes
(b) Rejection (Rava): There, blood from the majority source
is more common, surely we follow the majority in such a
case (no one would argue with R. Chanina about this)!
1. (R. Chiya): If blood was found in a woman's Prozdor,
she is considered definitely Teme'ah: she is liable
if she entered the Mikdash, we burn Terumah that she
(c) (Rava): We learn three things from R. Chiya's law.
1. When in doubt about where something came from, we
assume it came from the majority, even if the
minority is closer;
(d) Version #1A - Rashi - Question: Above, Rava said that
when the majority source is more common, all agree that
we follow the majority, but here he says that R. Chiya is
a support for R. Chanina!
2. Mid'Oraisa, we follow the majority;
3. R. Zeira's law is correct.
i. (R. Zeira): We follow even a single majority
(i.e. if the city doors are locked, so only one
majority applies, i.e. of the city, we do not
reckon with the majority of passersby).
ii. Also in a woman, there is only one majority,
there is no other place the blood could be
(e) Version #1B - Maharam (in Tosfos) - Question: Above, Rava
said that blood from the Aliyah (the majority source) is
more common (for if not, R. Chanina would not have taught
his law, it follows from R. Chiya's law), but here he
says that R. Chiya is a support for R. Chanina!
(f) Answer: Rava retracted, R. Chiya does not support R.
(g) Version #2 (R. Gershom) Question: Above, Rava said that
we follow the majority source only if it is more common -
here, he says we follow any majority!
(h) Answer: Rava retracted from what he said above. (End of
(i) (Rav): A barrel (of wine) floating in a river: if it was
found near a city that is mostly Yisraelim, it is
permitted; if the nearest city is mostly Nochrim, it is
(j) (Shmuel): Even if it was found near a city that is mostly
Yisraelim, it is forbidden - perhaps it came from Ihi
Dekira (a Nochri city upstream).
(k) Suggestion: They argue about R. Chanina's law: Shmuel
follows the majority like R. Chanina, Rav argues and
assumes it came from the closest.
(l) Rejection No, all agree with R. Chanina;
1. Rav says that it could not have come from Ihi
Dekira, for it would have broken on rocks in the
(m) A barrel of wine (was presumably stolen and) was found in
an orchard of Orlah; Ravina permitted it (we assume it
came from elsewhere - most fruit in the world is not
2. Shmuel says that it may have floated in the middle
of the river, where there are no rocks.
(n) Suggestion: Ravina holds like R. Chanina.
(o) Rejection: No - he only permitted in this case because a
thief would not hide wine in the place he stole the
grapes (lest they see him stomp them).
1. This only refers to wine, but he would hide the
(p) Jugs of wine were found hidden among vines in Reuven's
vineyard; Rava permitted them.
(q) Suggestion: Rava argues with R. Chanina (he goes after
the closest possible source, not the majority).
(r) Rejection: No, this case is different, most of the
vendors (in the entire region) selling jugs of wine are
2) A TREE NEAR A CITY
1. This only applies to large jugs, but small jugs are
forbidden, perhaps they fell from travelers (who may
have come from far away, the majority are Nochrim).
2. If large and small jugs are found together, all are
i. Travelers do not carry large jugs, but
merchants often use small jugs to balance a
load on the donkey.
(a) (Mishnah): We distance a tree 25 Amos from a city; a
carob or sycamore tree must be distanced 50 Amos;
3) DISTANCING A GRANARY
(b) Aba Sha'ul says, any barren tree must be distanced 50
1. If the city was there first, we (people of the city)
may cut it, we need not pay the owner;
(c) (Gemara) Question: Why must trees be distanced?
2. If the tree was there first, we may cut it, we must
3. If we are unsure which came first, we may cut it, we
need not pay.
(d) Answer (Ula): For the beauty of the city.
(e) Question: Even more should be forbidden, we may not
convert a Migrash (1000 Amos surrounding a city in each
direction) into a field or vice-versa!
(f) Answer #1: The Mishnah is R. Eliezer, who says that we
may convert a Migrash into a field or vice-versa;
1. Twenty-five Amos are forbidden on account of beauty
of the city.
(g) Answer #2: Even Chachamim, who say that we may not
convert a Migrash into a field or vice-versa, only forbid
a seeded field, but we may plant trees;
1. Twenty-five Amos are forbidden on account of beauty
of the city.
(h) Question: What is the source to distinguish between a
seeded field and trees?
(i) Answer (Beraisa): A Karfaf (an unroofed enclosed area)
more than the area in which one can grow two Se'ah that
was enclosed for dwelling: if the majority was seeded, it
is like a garden, it is forbidden to carry in it on
1. If the majority was planted (with trees), it is like
a Chatzer, it is permitted to carry in it.
(j) (Mishnah): If the city was there first, we (people of the
city) may cut it, we need not pay the owner.
(k) Question: If a tree is near a pit, the owner of the pit
may cut it and pay the owner (25B); if a tree near a
city, we (the city residents) may cut it and do not pay
1. Why are the laws different?
(l) Answer (Rav Kahana): An individual will pay (for the
tree) for the sake of his pit;
1. There are many people in the city, no one wants to
pay first. (If we cannot cut it without paying, it
will not be cut.)
(m) Objection: Why was the question asked? Damage to the
public is worse than damage to an individual!
(n) Correction: Rather, Rav Kahana replied to a question on
the end of the Mishnah.
(o) (Mishnah): If the tree was there first, we may cut it, we
(p) Question: Why can't the owner demand to be paid before
they cut the tree?
(q) Answer (Rav Kahana): It will be a long time before the
money is collected. (After we cut, the owner can go to
Beis Din to demand compensation.)
(r) (Mishnah): If we are unsure which came first, we may cut
it, we need not pay.
(s) Question: What is the difference between the case of a
pit (he may not cut when in doubt) and our case (when in
doubt, we cut)?
(t) Answer: If the tree preceded the pit, it should not be
cut - when in doubt, we do not cut;
1. Here, either way the tree should be cut, we may cut
2. We are in doubt if we must pay for it - to collect
money, the owner must bring proof.
(a) (Mishnah): We distance a fixed granary 50 Amos from a
(b) One may not make a fixed granary on his property unless
he owns 50 Amos around it in each direction.
1. He must distance it from his neighbor's saplings and
Nir (plowed, unseeded field) so it will not damage
(c) (Gemara) Question: Why is the law different in the last
case (50 Amos are not required)?
(d) Answer #1 (Abaye): The last clause speaks of a granary
that is not fixed.
1. Question: What is the case of a granary that is not
(e) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Fifty Amos are required; the last
clause explains the first clause:
2. Answer (R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina): There is so little
grain that the wind winnows it itself, one need not
throw it with a pitchfork.
1. We distance a fixed granary 50 Amos from a city in
order that it will not damage.
(f) Question (against Abaye - Beraisa): We distance a fixed
granary 50 Amos from a city;
1. We keep the same distance from gourds, saplings and
(g) We understand how the granary hurts gourds - the dust
enters the buds and dries them.
2. This is left difficult.
(h) Question: How does it harm a Nir?
(i) Answer (R. Aba bar Zavda): It overfertilizes it (this
burns the seeds).