(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 98



(a) Our Mishnah absolves Reuven from responsibility should he sell Shimon wine and it turns sour.

(b) The Tana does however, consider the sale false - if the seller's wine is known to turn sour?

(c) If Reuven promised to sell Shimon spiced wine, he must provide Shimon with his purchase before Shavu'os - because even spiced wine will be adversely affected by the heat of the summer season (Tekufas Tamuz), which begins shortly after Shavu'os.

(d) If he promised him ...

1. ... Yayin Yashan - he must provide him with last year's wine.
2. ... Yayin Meyushan - then he must provide him with wine from the year before last, and it must last until Succos (three complete years, as we will learn in a Beraisa later).
(a) Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina qualify Reisha of our Mishnah - by establishing the case when the wine is placed in the purchaser's barrels (for the sale to be valid), because that is what probably caused the wine to turn sour.

(b) We query this however, on the grounds that even if the wine were to have been in the seller's barrels, the purchaser would have had no right to blame the seller - because he should have used up the wine immediately, and not kept it for so long.

(c) We reply however - that the Tana is speaking when Reuven stipulated when he sold the wine, that he was selling it to him le'Mikpah (which is expected to last longer, as we learned earlier), which would explain why the sale would have been negated had the wine been in the seller's barrels.

(d) He would be liable, if the wine was in his barrels, in spite of the fact that it turned sour only after he had sold it - because wine that turns sour was poor-quality wine to begin with (as we learned above in the Sugya of Yayin Koses).

(a) Rav, who learned above that for the first three days following the sale, the wine remains in the seller's domain, will establish our Mishnah (which absolves the seller from responsibility) - either when the wine is in Shimon's barrels (even within three days), or when it is in barrels belonging to Reuven, but after three days.

(b) Rava proves from the Seifa ('ve'Im Yadu'a she'Yeino Machmitz, Harei Zeh Mekach Ta'us') - which can only be the case if we assume that he sold the wine le'Mikpah. Otherwise, Reuven can counter that Shimon should have used up the wine sooner.

(c) Even if the majority of people tended to leave wine for longer periods - we would blame the purchaser for not drinking the wine sooner, because, as we have already learned 'Ein Holchin be'Mamon Achar ha'Rov' (like the opinion of Shmuel, like whom we rule).

(d) Even according to Rav, who does go after the Rov in money-matters, we cannot go after the majority of people who purchase wine to keep for a long time, to hold Reuven responsible even if he did not sell the wine le'Mikpah - because this Rov is non-existent, since some people buy wine to drink immediately, whereas others buy it to drink over a long period.

(a) Rav Chiya bar Yosef disagrees with Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina. He learns from the Pasuk in Chavakuk "ve'Af Ki ha'Yayin Boged, Gever Yahir ... " - that when wine turns sour, it is due to the Mazel of the current owner (i.e. his conceit), meaning that the wine turns out to be not what he thought it was, just as he made himself out to be what he was not). Note, that this is probably not the Yayin Koses that we discussed earlier (which smells like vinegar but still tastes like wine, since that is poor-quality wine that will never mature, as we learned there, and is not subject to this Machlokes.

(b) Consequently - Reuven is Patur from reimbursing Shimon, even though he stipulated 'le'Mikpah', and even if the wine was in his (Reuven's) barrels.

(c) Rav Mari learns from the above-mentioned Pasuk " ... Gever Yahir ve'Lo Yinaveh" - that someone who is conceited will be despised by his own wife.

(d) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "ve'Lo *Yinaveh*" "el *Nevei* Kodshecha" - that someone who is conceited will not be allowed to enter the confines of the Shechinah.

(e) 'Kol ha'Misga'eh be'Talis shel Talmid-Chacham, ve'Eino Talmid-Chacham' - refers to someone who puts on airs as if he were a Talmid-Chacham by wearing clothes that are exceedingly modest in the style of a Talmid-Chacham (as we learned in 'Chezkas ha'Batim'), even though he is not.

(a) In the case of Reuven who gave Shimon the store-keeper a barrel of wine to sell for a small profit, should the wine turn sour after he sold a third or half of the barrel - Rava absolved Shimon from all responsibility, since he is no more than Reuven's Sheli'ach (seeing as he is neither joint-owner of the wine, nor is the barrel his).

(b) He would however, be liable to pay if he had changed the tap of the barrel (since this may have caused the wine to turn sour), or even if he hadn't - but if he delayed selling the barrel until after market day.

(c) If Shimon received a barrel of wine (to sell and share the profits) from Reuven, and a price-change occurs or the barrel is stolen or lost - then Reuven and Shimon share the gains and losses equally.

(a) In a case where Reuven instructed Shimon to sell the barrel in Davel Shafat (or Zulshefat), and the price dropped before he arrived there however, Rava rules - that Reuven must bear the entire loss (seeing as Shimon had no authority to sell it earlier anyway [any more than he would have had, had the price risen in his town before he arrived in Davel Shafat.

(b) They asked what the Din would be if under the same circumstances, the wine turned sour before Shimon arrived in Davel Shafat. Rav Hillel quoting Rav Kahana, answered Rav Ashi by quoting Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina, who rules - that as long as the wine is in the barrels of the seller, he must take responsibility for the wine (provided that the purchaser could not be expected to dispose of the wine immediately [as is the case here]).

(c) Consequently, Rav Hillel either ruled that if the wine became vinegar, the responsibility does not lie solely with Reuven (the seller), not like Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina; or that it does, like Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina.

(d) The Halachah is like the first Lashon (which in fact, rules like Rav Chiya bar Yosef, who places the responsibility on the shoulders of the owner or owners) - on the basis of Shmuel, who rules like the latter, and with whom Rav Yosef concurs (as we learned earlier in the Sugya).




(a) The minimum size room that Rebbi Akiva in our Mishnah obligates ...
1. ... a father who undertakes to accommodate his son after his marriage, to provide him with is - four by six Amos.
2. ... someone who sells his friend land to build a room for his son after his marriage is - four by six Amos.
(b) The same applies to a father-in-law for his widowed daughter. It is ...
1. ... the father who accommodates his son after his wedding (and not the father-in-law) - because due to the closeness that exists between a man and his mother-in-law, it is incorrect for a man to live with his parents-in-law (for fear that he might develop an illicit relationship with her), as ben Sira taught.
2. ... the father-in-law who needs to provide accommodation for his widowed daughter after her husband's death - for the same reason, because until now she and her husband were living with his parents.
(c) Rebbi Yishmael - considers four Amos by six a stable (and unfit to live in).

(d) If Reuven contracts Shimon to build him a room, or sold him land to build himself one, if he stipulated ...

1. ... a small room, he would be obligated to build a room - six by eight Amos.
2. ... a room, he would be obligated to build a room - six by eight Amos (since the builder, not having been given instructions, would have the upper hand).
3. ... a large room - eight by ten Amos.
4. ... a T'raklin (a dwelling for princes) - ten by ten Amos.
(a) The common height that each of the above must be is - half of the sum of the length and the breadth (five, seven, nine and ten Amos respectively).

(b) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel brings a proof from the Heichal (of the Beis-Hamikdash), which was - forty Amos long, twenty Amos wide and thirty Amos high.

(c) What ben Sira found that was lighter than ...

1. ... bran was - a man living in his mother-in-law's house.
2. ... a man living in his mother-in-law's house was - one guest inviting another guest.
3. ... one guest inviting another guest was - someone who replies to a question before the questioner has finished the question.
(a) If the author of the Mishnah 'ha'Rotzeh La'asos Refes Bakar, Boneh Arba Amos al Sheish' is Rebbi Yishmael, the explanation is obvious. Assuming the author to be Rebbi Akiva however, what the Tana is saying is - that even though these are the dimensions of a stable, people sometimes make their residences the size of stables.

(b) The difference between the two explanations is - that should the author be Rebbi Yishmael, Rebbi Akiva will argue with him in this regard too, inasmuch as, according to him, a stable is smaller than four by six Amos.

(a) We interpret 'T'raklin' in our Mishnah as Kuvsah Bei Vardi. The full name of 'Kubah', after which this room is named, is 'Kubah shel Zonos' (a brothel).

(b) This princely room is called by such a name - because, like a brothel, it contained many windows. They also used to adorn it with roses, hence the title 'Bei Vardi'. Note also, that the word 'Kubah' also means a cube, and the dimensions of the T'raklin were ten by ten by ten Amos.

(c) We learned in a Beraisa that if a contractor undertook to build someone a Kantir, he is obligated to build him a Tarbatz Apadni - a large courtyard similar to those which princes used to build beside their palaces.

(d) The significance of 'Tarbatz' is - they would constantly sprinkle water to *settle* the dust (which is what Tarbatz means).

(a) Some explain 'Re'ayah le'Davar' followed by the proof from the Heichal cited in our Mishnah in the name of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, as we explained it above. Others however, establish 'Re'ayah le'Davar' as a proof by the Chachamim. However, before they were able to explain what they meant - Raban Shimon ben Gamliel Omer interjected with 'ke'Binyan ha'Heichal?' He was querying the Chachamim's proof (which he knew was from the Heichal), on the grounds that one cannot compare other buildings to the Heichal, due to its Chashivus.

(b) We query the first interpretation, which seems to be the obvious one - on the basis of the fact that the Tana placed the words 'Re'ayah le'Davar' before 'Raban Shimon ben Gamliel Omer', instead of afterwards, as one would have expected.

(a) Acherim in a Beraisa gives the height of a house as 'the beams' - which is the equivalent to its width (because that is how the beams are generally placed).

(b) One possible reason that Acherim equates the height with the length of the beams, rather than with the width of the house, is because 'Beisa me'Ila'i Ravach' which means - that, for strength, they tended to build houses wider at the bottom and narrower at the top. Consequently, the measurement of the beam was correspondingly less than the width of the house (which would have been measured at the base).

(c) The second answer to this Kashya is - that the width of the house might exclude the width of the walls (which housed the windows), whereas the beams, which ran between the two outer extremities of the two walls, included it.

(a) When Rebbi Chanina went to town, they asked him an apparent discrepancy between two Pesukim in Melachim. One Pasuk gives the dimensions of the Heichal together with the D'vir as we quoted them earlier, including a height of thirty Amos; the second Pasuk gives it as twenty.

(b) Rebbi Chanina resolved the discrepancy - by establishing the second Pasuk by the height of the D'vir above the edge of the Keruvim (and not from the floor).

(c) The Pasuk gives the height of the D'vir as twenty Amos, measured from above the Keruvim, and not the real height of thirty Amos from the floor, to teach us - that the lower ten Amos contained nothing (as if the Keruvim and the Aron were not there, as we shall now see), just as the top twenty Amos really did.

Next daf


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