(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 156

BAVA BASRA 156 - This Daf has been dedicated in memory of Yitzchak Lubin, and for a Refu'ah Sheleimah for Chaya Miriam bas Sara and for Yehudah Baruch ben Sara Menucha. (Dedicated by Rabbi and Mrs. Lipshutz of Monsey, NY).



(a) Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel says - that Kidushin, Gerushin, Chalitzah and Miy'unin all require inspection to make sure that the boy (or the girl) is a Gadol (or is not a Gedolah, in the case of Miy'unin). But when it comes to selling a father's property on the other hand, the Tana requires the son to be twenty.

(b) Having examined a boy for Kidushin, it is not in fact necessary to examine him again for Gerushin - only the Tana is talking about Gerushin after Yibum (which a boy can legally perform from the age of nine).

(a) The problem with the Tana including Chalitzah in the list is - the fact that Chalitzah follows Gerushin in many respects, and once we know one, we also know the other.

(b) In fact, he does this to preclude the opinion of Rebbi Yossi - who says that even though a boy can perform Chalitzah from the age of nine, a girl must be twelve.

(c) And he includes (the maximum age of) Miy'un, to preclude the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah - who gives the girl until the hair has grown longer, and can be doubled (which is a short while after she has turned twelve), whereas the inspection is only effective as long as the age is twelve (by which age the hair has normally grown to a minimal length).

(a) And the Tana inserts 'vi'Le'mkor be'Nechsei Aviv, ad she'Yehei ben Esrim' - to preclude from those who give the age as eighteen.

(b) This Halachah - does not extend to property that a Yasom owns which he received as a gift from other sources or which he purchased. These he may sell from the age of six or seven, like Metaltelin.

(a) We rule like Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel in all of these cases.

(b) With regard to the Machlokes 'Toch Z'man ... ' - we rule 'Toch Z'man ke'Lifnei ha'Z'man'.

(c) We also conclude 'Hilchesa ke'Gidal bar Menasheh', who authorizes a thirteen-year old who is conversant with salesmanship, to sell his father's property - even Karka, as we explained above.

(d) And we conclude ...

1. ... 'Hilchesa ke'Mar Zutra' - who permits a Yasom to testify on Metaltelin from the age of thirteen, but not on Karka.
2. ... 'Hilchesa ka'Ameimar' - who validates the gift of a thirteen-year old Yasom, even though his sale is invalid.
(a) Rebbi Elazar in our Mishnah says that if a Shechiv-Mera distributes ...
1. ... Karka - the beneficiary acquires it only if he made a Kinyan Kesef, Sh'tar or Chazakah.
2. ... Metaltelin - then he must make a Meshichah.
(b) And he said that if a Shechiv-Mera gave away all his property without a Kinyan, and then died - the beneficiary does not acquire it.

(c) The Chachamim ruled in the case of the mother of the sons of Ruchel, who bequeathed her brooch to her daughter without a Kinyan, and then died - that the brooch should be given to the daughter (even though no Kinyan had been made).

(d) Rebbi Elazar replied by cursing the sons of Ruchel - because they were Resha'im (as will be explained later). Consequently, the Chachamim imposed a fine on them by declaring the gift to their sister valid.




(a) It is unclear whether the mother of the sons of Ruchel gave away only her brooch - in which case, we must establish the Mishnah by 'Metzaveh Machmas Miysah' (according to the Chachamim, as we have learned before), or whether she did so in the process of giving away all her property (see Rashash) - in which case, the Tana can even be speaking S'tam.

(b) According to the first Tzad - we will have a proof that Rebbi Elazar argues on the principle 'Divrei Shechiv-Mera ki'Chesuvin ve'Chimesurin Dami', even by 'Metzaveh Machmas Miysah', whereas according to the second Tzad - he may concede to the principle in a case of 'Metzaveh Machmas Miysah'.

(a) Rebbi Elazar in a Beraisa cites the case of a certain 'Maruni' (or 'Maduni') in Yerushalayim, who wanted to give away his numerous Metaltelin as a Matnas Shechiv-Mera. The Chachamim advised him - to be Makneh his property to the beneficiaries together with Karka.

(b) He reacted to their advice - by purchasing a rock near Yerushalayim, which he then proceeded to give to his beneficiaries, the north to Reuven, together with a hundred sheep and a hundred barrels of wine, and the south to Shimon, together with a hundred sheep and a hundred barrels of wine.

(c) When the Rabbanan upheld the Maruni's actions, Rebbi Elazar attempted to prove from there - that a Matnas Shechiv-Mera requires a Kinyan.

(d) The Rabbanan countered Rebbi Elazar's proof however - on the grounds that the Maruni (according to their information) was a Bari, and not a Shechiv-Mera at all.

(a) Rebbi Elazar cursed the sons of Ruchel, says Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel - because they maintained thorns in a vineyard, which is forbidden, according to his opinion in the Mishnah in Kil'ayim.

(b) His argument was that the Arabians would retain thorns - in order to feed their camels, who liked them, even though people did not.

(c) We cannot just answer that they were sinners, who deserved to be cursed - because then, the Chachamim would have agreed with Rebbi Elazar.

(d) The Chachamim however, permit thorns in a vineyard - because we go after the majority of the world (who do not retain thorns), and Arabia is not the majority of the world.

(a) Rebbi Levi permits a Kinyan Shechiv-Mera to be performed, even on Shabbos - because we are afraid that if we don't, he will become confused, and this will hasten his death.

(b) We might have ascribed the reason for this concession - to Rebbi Elazar, who requires a Kinyan by a Shechiv-Mera, in any case.

(c) We don't however - because the Halachah is not like Rebbi Elazar.

(a) Rebbi Eliezer confines the Din of 'Devarav Kayamin' of a Shechiv-Mera to Shabbos - where it is forbidden to make a Kinyan and to write a Sh'tar, but not to a weekday - where he can make a Kinyan and write a Sh'tar.

(b) Rebbi Yehoshua says - 'be'Shabbos Amru, Kal va'Chomer' be'Chol, where he could have made a Kinyan had he so wished, and we have a principle 'Kol ha'Ra'uy le'Bilah, Ein Be'ilah Me'akeves Bo'.

(c) Similarly, Rebbi Eliezer holds - 'Zachin le'Katan (since he does not have a Yad to acquire himself), ve'Ein Zachin le'Gadol' (who is able to acquire himself).

(d) Rebbi Yehoshua says - 'Le'Katan Amru, Kal va'Chomer le'Gadol (who could have acquired the article himself).

(a) The author of our Mishnah is Rebbi Yehudah. According to Rebbi Meir, Rebbi Eliezer permits a Matnas Shechiv-Mera - only during the week (when he could have made a Kinyan [because of 'Kol ha'Ra'uy le'Bilah']).

(b) And Rebbi Yehoshua says - 'be'Chol Amru, 'Kal va'Chomer be'Shabbos' (where he would otherwise not be able to give away his property).

(c) Similarly, Rebbi Eliezer holds 'Zachin le'Gadol, ve'Ein Zachin le'Katan'. Rebbi Yehoshua says - 'le'Gadol Amru, 'Kal va'Chomer le'Katan'.

Next daf


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