ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Basra 149
(a) Rav Sheshes rules that 'Yitol', 'Yizkeh', 'Yachzik' and 'Yikneh' - are
all a Lashon Matanah, and are therefore valid by a Matnas Shechiv-Mera.
(b) We might otherwise have thought - that, like 'Yidor P'loni ba'Bayis Zeh
(which we discussed earlier), they are all abstract Leshonos, and are
(c) The Beraisa seems to have taken Rav Sheishes' cases for granted. The
Tana adds 'Yachsin' and 'Yares', to teach us - that if the Shechiv-Mera
bequeaths his property to one of the Yorshim, he acquires it (like Rebbi
Yochanan ben Berokah, whom we discussed earlier in the Perek).
(d) We ask what the Din will be in the case of 'Yehaneh Bahen', 'Yera'eh
Bahen', Ya'amod Bahen' or 'Yisha'en Bahen'. The She'eilah is - whether these
are expressions of Matanah, or whether they are abstract expressions of
merely having Hana'ah (like in the previous She'eilah).
(e) The outcome of these She'eilos is once again - 'Teiku'.
(a) We then ask about a Shechiv-Mera who sold all his property. We Rav
Yehudah Amar Rav, who sometimes ruled that he cannot retract, and at other
times, ruled that he can - by establishing the former ruling when the money
is still intact (when we assume that he deliberately refrained from using
it, in order to be able to retract from the sale and return the money should
he recover, and the latter ruling when the money has already been spent.
(b) We query this ruling however, from an episode that took place concerning
Isur Giyora, from whom Rava had borrowed twelve thousand Zuz.
1. ... Isur Giyora - was the captor who raped one of Shmuel's daughters,
(c) Rav Mari did not automatically acquire his father's estate - because,
although by the time he was born, Isur Giyora had already converted, at the
time of conception, he was still a Nochri (and a Ger does not inherit his
father who converted after he is born).
2. ... Rav Mari - was later born from that incident.
(d) Rava thought that he would acquire the money (and not Rav Mari) -
because he knew that the latter would have a problem in how to give it to
him (as we shall now see).
(a) We just explained why Rav Mari did not automatically inherit Isur
Giyora. Neither could the latter give him the money ...
We have now proved from this episode - that the beneficiary acquires the
property on the Shechiv-Mera's admission alone.
1. ... as a Matnas Shechiv-Mera - because Chazal gave a Shechiv-Mera the Din
of a Yoresh, so whoever cannot inherit, cannot receive a Matnas Shechiv-Mera
(b) Neither could he give it to him through the Takanah of Ma'amad
Sheloshtan - because Rava made it clear that he would not make himself
available, even if Isur Giyora were to call him.
2. ... through a. Meshichah or b. Chalipin - since a. the money was not
there (on which to make Meshichah) and b. money cannot be acquired with
3. ... together with Karka - simply because Isur Giyora did not own any
(c) When Rav Ika B'rei de'Rav Ami asked why he did not simply admit that the
money belonged to Rav Mari - that is precisely what he did.
(d) Rava was angry - that someone had obviously divulged what they had
discussed in the Beis-Hamedrash, thereby assisting Rav Mari against himself.
(a) We learned in our Mishnah 'Shiyer Karka Kol-she'Hu, Matanaso Kayemes'.
Rav Yehudah Amar Rav interprets 'Kol-she'Hu' to mean - sufficient to live
off, should he recover.
(b) Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba adds - that even Metaltelin of that amount will
suffice to render the Matanah irreversible.
1. Rebbi Zeira praises Rav Yehudah Amar Rav - because logically, that is the
amount that would clinch the gift, and Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba, because there
is no logical reason to differentiate between Karka and Metaltelin.
2. Rav Yosef refutes Rebbi Zeira's statement - on the grounds that the Tana
said 'Karka Kol-she'Hu', and the Amora'im should not have changed it.
(a) Abaye queries Rav Yosef from a Mishnah in Pe'ah, where the Tana says
1. ... if someone writes all his property to his Eved - he goes free
(because the Eved himself is included in the property that he acquires).
(b) Rebbi Shimon disagrees. According to him, for the Eved not to go free,
the owner must say 'Kol Nechasai Nesunin li'Peloni Avdi Chutz me'Echad
me'Ribu she'Bahen' (without mentioning 'Karka', which according to him, does
not automatically include Avadim [see also Melo ha'Ro'im).
2. ... if he left over 'Karka Kol she'Hu' - he does not go free (because,
seeing as Avadim are compared to Karka, perhaps the Eved is the 'Karka
Kol-she'Hu' to which the owner referred).
(c) Rav Dimi Rav Yosef Amar Rebbi Elazar 'Asu Metaltelin Shiyur Eitzel
Eved'. He says that - because Avadim are also compared to Metaltelin (since
they are not attached to the ground).
(a) When Rav Dimi bar Yosef says 've'Lo Asu Metaltelin Shiyur Eitzel
Kesuvah', he is referring to -a case where a man writes all his property to
his sons, and one field to his wife (in which case she would certainly lose
her Kesuvah, if she remained silent).
We just cited Rebbi Akiva in the Mishnah in Pe'ah, who says 'Karka Kol
she'Hu Chayeves be'Pe'ah'. He lists three other things that require 'Karka
Kol she'Hu', Bikurim, P'ruzbul - and acquiring Metaltelin together with it
by means of Kesef, Sh'tar or Chazakah.
(b) And he is teaching us that the Tana's ruling is confined to where the
man leaves his wife Karka, but where he leaves her Metaltelin, she does not
lose her Kesuvah, because women tended not to rely on Metaltelin for their
(c) Abaye tries to prove from here - that when the Mishnah says 'Karka', it
does not necessarily come to preclude Metaltelin.
(d) Rav Yosef refutes Abaye's Kashya however - on the grounds that normally,
when the Tana says Karka, he means Karka, and it is specifically in the
Mishnah in Pe'ah, where he only mentions 'Karka' because of the Reisha
('Rebbi Akiva Omer, Karka Kol-she'Hu Chayeves be'Pe'ah'), where we can say
that Karka is 'La'av Davka'.