(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Bava Basra 76

BAVA BASRA 76& 77- sponsored by Harav Ari Bergmann of Lawrence, N.Y., out of love for the Torah and for those who study it.



(a) The Beraisa states 'Sefinah Nikneis bi'Meshichah'. Rebbi Nasan says - 'Sefinah ve'Osiyos (which means 'a Sh'tar-Chov') Niknos bi'Meshichah u'vi'Sh'tar'.

(b) The problem with ...

1. ... Rebbi Nasan's statement is - that seeing as the Tana Kama did not mention 'Osiyos', why does Rebbi Nasan mention it?
2. ... the Tana Kama (even after we add 've'Osiyos bi'Mesirah' to his statement) is - why does Rebbi Nasan require a Sh'tar to acquire a ship (which is after all, Metaltelin)?
(c) So we amend Rebbi Nasan's statement to read 'Sefinah Niknos bi'Meshichah, ve'Osiyos bi'Sh'tar'.
(a) According to Rebbi Nasan, if one were to acquire 'Osiyos' with Mesirah alone - he would acquire it, but only to use as a bottle-stopper (not to claim with).

(b) And when he says that one acquires Osiyos with a Sh'tar, he means - with a Sh'tar (in order to acquire the contents of the Sh'tar and the Shibud) as well as with Mesirah (with which he acquires the actual document).

(c) According to both Tana'im, one cannot acquire a Sh'tar-Chov with Meshichah - because Meshichah only acquires something that has intrinsic value.

(d) Rebbi Nasan statement 'Sefinah bi'Meshichah' appears to tally with the Tana Kama's opinion. Initially, we equate their Machlokes - with that of Rav and Shmuel. The Tana Kama requires a full-scale Meshichah (the entire length of the ship [like Shmuel]); whereas Rebbi Nasan requires only a slight Meshichah (like Shmuel).

(a) We conclude that Rebbi Nasan and the Tana Kama do not argue with regard to acquiring a ship through Meshichah - either according to Rav, or according to Shmuel.

(b) They are arguing about whether one acquires Osiyos with Mesirah alone (the Tana Kama), or whether one requires a Sh'tar too (Rebbi Nasan).

(c) This too, is not a new Machlokes - because it is an established Machlokes between Rebbi and the Chachamim.

(d) Rebbi, in another Beraisa, says 'Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah'. According to the Chachamim, one acquires a Sh'tar-Chov - with Mesirah and a Sh'tar (as we explained in Rebbi Nasan).




(a) In another Beraisa, Rebbi says 'Sefinah Nikneis bi'Mesirah'. According to the Chachamim - one acquires a ship either by means of Meshichah, or by hiring the place where it is located.

(b) In that case, in spite of having established the Tana Kama of Rebbi Nasan like Rebbi, one requires Meshichah to acquire the ship (and not with Mesirah, like Rebbi) - because whereas Rebbi is speaking in the Reshus-ha'Rabim (where Meshichah cannot acquire), the Rabbanan of Rebbi Nasan are speaking in a Simta (an alleyway where it can).

(c) Mesirah is not Koneh in a Simta, because since it is available to acquire with Meshichah (which by difinition, entails drawing the animal into one's own domain), people tend not to use it for Mesirah.

(a) Abaye and Rava categorize the locations of the various Kinyanim. Meshichah acquires in the Reshus ha'Rabim and in a Simta. The equivalent two locations where Meshichah is Koneh are - a Simta and a Chatzer that is jointly owned by both parties.

(b) Hagbahah acquires - everywhere.

(c) Even though Rebbi is speaking in a Reshus ha'Rabim, when the Chachamim say ...

1. ... 'ad she'Yimshachenah', they mean - until he draws the animal from the Reshus ha'Rabim into his domain.
2. ... 'O ad she'Yiskor es Mekomo', they mean to say - that if it would be the owner's domain, then he would rent him the animal's location together with the animal.
(a) We initially establish Abaye and Rava (with regard to Mesirah) - like Rebbi (who holds that one can acquire a ship with Mesirah).

(b) We conclude however, that even the Chachamim would agree that a ship can be acquired in the Reshus ha'Rabim with Mesirah - if the owner were to say 'Lech Chazek u'Keni'.

(c) They argue with Rebbi to require specifically Meshichah - in a case where the owner said 'Lech Meshoch u'Keni', which he means literally, according to them.

(d) And the reason that Rebbi nevertheless validates Mesirah is - because his words were only an indication. What he really meant to say was that the purchaser could now draw the ship into his domain, seeing as he had acquired it with Mesirah.

(a) According to Rav Papa, someone who acquires a Sh'tar-Chov needs to specify - that the purchaser should acquire the Sh'tar together with its contents.

(b) He needs to specify this - in the Sh'tar, because he holds like the Rabbanan of Rebbi, who require a Sh'tar together with Mesirah in order to acquire a Sh'tar.

(c) Does this mean, Rav Ashi asked Rav Kahana, that if the seller fails to write this, the purchaser only acquires the Sh'tar to use as a bottle-stopper. Rav Ashi's Kashya is based on the fact - that he himself holds like Rebbi ('Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah'), and that no Sh'tar is required.

(d) Rav Kahana replied - in the affirmative.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,