REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Basra 49
BAVA BASRA 48 & 49 - these Dafim have been dedicated anonymously l'Iluy
Nishmas Tzirel Nechamah bas Tuvya Yehudah.
(a) We just cited Rav Nachman, who rules that both 'Amanah Hayu Devareinu'
and 'Moda'a Hayu Devareinu' are not believed.
What does Rav Ashi hold?
(b) We already cited Mar bar Rav Ashi (or Rav Ashi)'s reason by 'Amanah Hayu
From which Pasuk does he learn it?
(c) How do we know that he disagrees with Rav Nachman's reasoning in this
case (that the witnesses cannot negate a Sh'tar), even though he agrees with
(d) How does he define the difference between the two rulings in a nutshell?
(a) With regard to Mar bar Rav Ashi's ruling validating 'Moda'a Hayu
Devareinu' (even if they testify orally), on what grounds does he say 'Zeh
(b) Are the witnesses believed even if their signatures are substantiated
from another source?
(c) Why is it not considered 'Chozer u'Magid?
(d) Which case *would* be considered 'Chozer u'Magid'?
(a) We learned in our Mishnah 'Ein le'Ish Chazakah be'Nechsei Ishto', and we
ask why it is not obvious that, since he is permitted to eat the Peiros of
his wife's Nechsei Milug, he cannot establish a Chazakah on them.
the difference between this case and Mashkanta de'Sura, where the debtor
needs to make a Mecha'ah (despite the fact that there too, the creditor is
permitted to eat the Peiros)?
(b) How do we establish our Mishnah to answer the Kashya why it is not
(c) In that case, why do we initially think, can he not establish a
(a) What does the Beraisa say about someone who says to his friend 'Din
u'Devarim Ein Li al Sadeh Zeh' (or a similar Lashon of withdrawal),
intending to give him the field as a gift?
Answers to questions
(b) Then how will it help to rrelinquish one's rights on his wife's Nechsei
Milug in this way?
(c) de'Bei Rebbi Yanai, who gives this answer, bases it on a statement of
What did Rav Kahana say about a Nachalah ha'Ba'ah Lo le'Adam
mi'Makom Acher? What is a 'Nachalah ha'Ba'ah Lo le'Adam mi'Makom Acher'?
(a) Rav Kahana's statement is based on a broader principle presented by
What did he say?
(b) Rava, in turn, made his statement in connection with a ruling of Rav
Huna Amar Rav.
What did Rav Huna Amar Rav say about a woman who does not
want to work for her husband?
(c) Why did Rava present his principle specifically on Rav Huna Amar Rav's
(d) What is the reason for the principle?
(a) On what basis can woman ...
(b) Why might the man relinquish his claim on the Peiros of his wife's
Nechsei Milug? What did they obligate him to do in return?
- ... decline to work for her husband, seeing as he is the one who will be losing out and not her?
- ... retract, even after they are married, when the Takanah is already in effect?
(a) What can we extrapolate from our Mishnah 'Ein le'Ish Chazakah be'Nechsei
(b) The Mishnah in Gitin rules that if Rueven purchased all Shimon's fields
(which were automatically Meshubad to his wife's Kesuvah) and then paid his
wife a token fee for her rights in the fields, 'Mikcho Bateil'.
(c) What is the reason for this ruling?
(a) We reconcile this with the previous inference from our Mishnah, by
citing Rabah bar Rav Huna.
Answers to questions
How does Rabah bar Rav Huna establish the
Mishnah in Gitin to tally with our Mishnah?
(b) What is the difference between a field 'she'Kasav Lah bi'Kesuvasah', and
'she'Yiched Lah bi'Kesuvasah'?
(c) Which is the third field upon which a woman implicitly relies?