(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 121

BAVA BASRA 121 (10 Av) - dedicated by Mrs. G. Kornfeld (Rabbi Kornfeld's mother) to the memory of her father, Reb Yisrael Shimon ben Shlomo ha'Levi Turkel. Reb Yisrael Turkel loved Torah and supported it with his last breath. He passed away on 10 Av, 5740.



(a) Rebbi Yossi (or Rav Asi) bar Nasan did not understand the Beraisa we are about to quote, until his Rebbe explained it to him - Rav Sheishes, whom he followed first to Neherda'a and then to Mechuza, before catching up with him.

(b) Rav Sheishes explained the Tana Kama, who extrapolates from the Pasuk "Mo'adei Hashem Asher Tikre'u Osam ... ", 'Mo'adei Hashem Ne'emru, Shabbos Bereishis Lo Ne'emru' to mean - that Yom-Tov requires Kidush, but not Shabbos.

(c) He learns this on the basis of the fact - that "Mo'adei Hashem" appears twice in the Pasuk, one of which is superfluous.

(d) We might have thought otherwise - because Shabbos, after all, appears in the Parshah of Mo'adim (so it ought to have the same Din as Mo'adim).

(a) The above D'rashah - refers (not to the individual's Mitzvah of Kidush, which applies on Shabbos from "Zachor es Yom ha'Shabbos le'Kadsho", but) to the Mitzvah of Kidush Beis-Din on the Sunday before (like Kidush Beis-Din of Yom-Tov, which took place on the preceding Rosh Chodesh).

(b) The Tana refers to Shabbos as 'Shabbos Bereishis' - because it was fixed by Hashem at the Creation (unlike Yom-Tov, which is constantly fixed by Beis-Din).

(c) Rav Sheishes explains ben Azai, who said 'Mo'adei Hashem Ne'emru, Hafaras Nedarim Lo Ne'emru' to mean - that Hafaras Nedarim (by which he really means Hataras Nedarim) does not require a Beis-Din shel Mumchin, like Kidush Beis-Din does.

(d) There is no discrepancy between ben Azai's D'rashah and the Torah's own words "Rashei ha'Matos" - since the latter refers to a Yachid Mumcheh, as we explained earlier.

(a) In the Mishnah on Ta'anis, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel describes Yom Kipur and Chamishah-Asar be'Av as the greatest Yamim-Tovim. On them - the girls would go out to the vineyards and dance.

(b) They would all wear borrowed dresses - so as not to embarrass the girls from poor families, who could not afford pretty clothes.

(c) Yom Kipur is the happiest of days because it is a day of forgiveness, the day when Moshe descended from Har Sinai with the second Luchos. Based on the Pasuk in Mas'ei "Zeh ha'Davar" (implying that the Isur of Hasavas Nachalah was confined to that generation only, as we explained earlier), Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel gives the reason for the Simchah on Chamishah-Asar be'Av as being - because it was the day when the tribes were permitted to intermarry once again.

(d) Rav Dimi bar Yosef Amar Rav Nachman ascribes the Simchah on Tu be'Av to the fact that the last of the generation that left Egypt died. His explanation is not synonymous with that of Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel - because that was not the generation to which Hasavas Nachalah applied (as we explained earlier).

4) Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan ascribes the Simchah on Tu be'Av to the fact that the tribes became reunited with Binyamin once again. He learns this from the Pasuk "Ish *Mimenu* Lo Yiten es Bito le'Vinyamin le'Ishah" - which implies 'from us', but not from our children (who will be permitted to intermarry with them).


(a) We just cited the explanation of Rav Dimi bar Yosef Amar Rav Nachman. In fact, it was on Tish'ah be'Av of the previous year that the last person of that generation died. On Tish'ah be'Av of that year, everyone arose from the graves that they dug themselves each year, in which fifteen thousand plus would simply not get up, and they discovered that the entire generation had died out. However, in order to ascertain that they had not erred in the day of the month, they continued with the procedure until the fifteenth of Av, when there was a full moon and there could be no more doubt that Tish'ah be'Av had passed.

(b) The real reason for the Simchah was - the fact that, since now the sadness that accompanied the annual deaths now dissipated (preventing the Shechinah from appearing), Hashem appeared to Moshe once again, as He used to do before the episode with the Meraglim.

(c) Rav Nachman derives this from the juxtaposition of the two Pesukim "Va'yehi Ka'asher Tamu Kol Anshei ha'Milchamah la'Mus ... Va'yedaber Hashem Eilai Leimor". This does not imply that Hashem did not speak to Moshe throughout the thirty-eight years from the Meraglim until then - but that He did not speak with him with the same intensity as He used to, or that He did speak with Him unless the need arose.

(d) Rav Nachman might learn his D'rashah from the fact that the first of these Pesukim is superfluous. Alternatively, he might learn it from - the Lashon "va'Yedaber Hashem ... " and not "va'Yomer Hashem ... " (the Lashon that it uses a little earlier in the Parshah), which implies with greater intensity (and love).




(a) Ula connects the Simchah of Tu be'Av to the border-guards whom Yeravam (the first king of the ten tribes) set-up to prevent the ten tribes from going up to Yerushalayim on the Shalosh Regalim. The cause for the Simchah was - the fact that Hoshe'a ben Eilah (the last of those kings), prompted by the fact that the Golden Calves set up by Yeravam to replace the worship of Hashem in the Beis-Hamikdsh, was exiled, removed them.

(b) Rav Masnah connects the Simchah with those who were killed in the last stronghold of Beitar by the Romans. The cause of the Simchah was - the fact that after seven years lying in the open, the Romans finally allowed the corpses to be buried.

(c) On the same day, he says, the Chachamim in Yavneh instituted the B'rachah of 'ha'Tov ve'ha'Meitiv' (in Birchas ha'Mazon).

1. 'ha'Tov' - that they were finally brought to burial.
2. ... 'ha'Meitiv' - that they did not begin to decompose during that time.
(d) According to Rabah and Rav Yosef, the Simchah is connected with the completion of the Mitzvah of cutting the wood for the Mizbe'ach, which began in Nisan. The significance of the final date is based on Rebbi Eliezer, who said - that when the fifteenth of Av arrives, the power of the sun begins to wane (which leads to increase in smoke and in worms [both of which will disqualify the wood from the Mizbe'ach]).
(a) The decline in the heat would not cause wood that was cut before Tu be'Av to become wormy anyway - because once wood has been cut-off from the tree, it does not become wormy.

(b) Rav Menasheh informs us that this day became known as 'Yom Tavar Magal' - which means the day on which they broke their sickles.

(c) Rebbi Eliezer also describes this day - as being the day when the nights begin to grow longer, and on which one should therefore begin to work less and learn more.

(d) Rav Yosef explains the latter half of Rav Menasheh's final statement 'she'Eino Mosef Yasif' to mean - that if someone does not do that, he will die prematurely ('his mother will bury him'), like we find at the end of Megilas Esther "ve'Zichrom La *Yasuf* mi'Zar'am" (meaning 'and the memory of these days will not *terminate* from their descendants').

(a) The Beraisa lists seven people who spanned the world from the Creation until the present day and beyond. Adam ha'Rishon is the first of these. The last of them is - Eliyahu ha'Navi (who is still alive).

(b) If ...

1. ... Mesushelach served Adam - Shem served Mesushelach.
2. ... Ya'akov served Shem - Amram served Ya'akov
3. ... Achiyah ha'Shiloni served Amram - Eliyahu served Achiyah ha'Shiloni.
(c) We prefer to list Mesushelach rather than Lemech (who also served Adam) - because the list includes only Tzadikim.

(d) When Mesushelach died, Shem was - ninety-eight years old (seeing as Mesushelach died only a week before the Flood, and Shem turned a hundred, two years after the Flood).

(a) It is logical to say that Amram saw Ya'akov - because his father Kehas, was among those who went down to Egypt, seventeen years before the death of Ya'akov, and Amram was Kehas' oldest son.

(b) According to other Medrashim, only two people spanned the world, Adam and Chanoch (on the assumtion that the latter became the Angel Matatron, only our Tana holds that Chanoch really died).

(c) This Tana interprets the Pasuk "ve'Einenu Ki Lakach Oso Elokim" - to mean that he died prematurely (since he buried Adam and Chavah) surviving the former by only fifty-seven years (even though he was born hundreds of years after him).

(d) We know that, according to this Tana, Pinchas was not Eliyahu - because otherwise, we could have listed six generations, by concluding that Moshe served Amram, and Pinchas served Moshe (omitting Achiyah altogether).

(a) Bearing in mind that Ya'akov lived in Egypt 17 years, and that Amram lived 137 years, the youngest age that Achiyah ha'Shiloni (who saw Amram) could possibly have been at the time of the Exodus was - 56 (210- 137+17).

(b) This leaves us with a problem, because we know that none of those who left Egypt entered Eretz Yisrael. We know that Achiyah ha'Shiloni entered Eretz Yisrael - because he was the Navi who crowned Yeravam, King of the ten tribes.

(c) Rav Hamnuna initially answers by listing Achiyah ha'Shiloni as a Levi. That would solve the problem - because the Torah specifically writes in Sh'lach Lecha "ba'Midbar ha'Zeh Yiplu Pigreichem ve'Chol Pekudeichem le'Chol Misparchem", implying that the decree of the Spies was confined to those who were counted from the age of twenty (to preclude tribe of Levi, who were counted from the age of one month).

(a) Ya'ir and Machir were -sons of Menasheh.

(b) The Beraisa says - that they left Egypt at the time of the Exodus, yet they entered Eretz Yisrael.

(c) The Pasuk records that the men of Ay smote thirty-six men of Yisrael. Rebbi Nechemyah disagrees with Rebbi Yehudah, who interprets this literally - on the basis of the Lashon of the Pasuk "ki'Sheloshim- ve'Shishah Ish" (and not "Sheloshim-ve'Shishah Ish").

(d) He therefore interprets the Pasuk with regard to Ya'ir ben Menasheh - who was killed, and who is considered like thirty-six Tzadikim (the majority of the Sanhedrin), proving at least, that *he* entered Eretz Yisrael (although he left Egypt [that Machir did is presumably, a tradition]).

(a) We have proved from this Beraisa - that it is not only members of the tribe of Levi who left Egypt and entered Eretz Yisrael, but also from other tribes (in which case, it is also possible that Achiyah ha'Shiloni was not a Levi after all).

(b) In the realm of Erchin, someone who is under twenty has in common with someone who is over sixty - that they are both evaluated at less than the full Erech of fifty Shekalim (for men) or thirty Shekalim (for women).

(c) Based on this fact, Rav Acha bar Ya'akov learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "va'Ma'alah" (in Sh'lach-Lecha ["mi'ben Esrim Shanah va'Ma'alah"]) from "va'Ma'alah" by Erchin - that just as those over sixty are compared to those under twenty by Erchin, so too, are they compared with regard to being outside the decree of having to die in the desert.

(d) Assuming that Achiyah ha'Shiloni was not a ben Levi, the minimum number of years that he would then have had to see Amram for him to have entered Eretz Yisrael is - five years, making his age sixty-one when he left Egypt.

(a) They asked whether Eretz Yisrael was divided up 'li'Shevatim' (according to the tribes) or 'le'Karfaf Gavri' (according to the number of people) - in other words, whether it was divided into twelve equal portions irrespective of how many people it comprised, or whether it was divided according to its size (i.e. the larger the tribe, the larger the portion).

(b) We resolve the She'eilah from the Beraisa which merely quotes the Pasuk in Pinchas "Bein Rav li'Me'at" - implying that some people received bigger portions than others, whereas if Eretz Yisrael was divided according to the people, then everyone would receive the same size portion. (According to this, we conclude that Eretz Yisrael was divided 'li'Shevatim'.

Next daf


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