(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 124


(a) In the current Beraisa, which discusses the Machlokes between Rebbi and the Rabbanan, the Tana states 'Yarshu Sh'tar Chov, Bechor Notel Pi Shenayim'.
Who is the author of this statement?

(b) Why does Rebbi confine this ruling to a Sh'tar Chov? Why will it not apply to an oral debt?

(c) And what does the Tana say about a case where someone produced a Sh'tar Chov against *them*?

(d) Who is the author of this statement? Is it a continuation of the previous one?

(a) What does the Tana mean when he adds 've'Im Amar Eini Nosen ve'Eini Notel Rashai'?

(b) How do we know that he is not authorizing the Bechor to decline to take an extra portion of the heir's claim, and not to pay an extra portion of the claim against them?

(c) Seeing as the creditor claims the land anyway, what practical difference does the Bechor's withdrawal make?

(d) Why can an heir not withdraw from his inheritance, nor a Bechor from his Cheilek Pashut?

(a) What do the Rabbanan learn from the Pasuk "*La'ses Lo* Pi Shenayim"?

(b) Does Rebbi agree with this D'rashah on principle? What does he learn from it?

(c) Then why does he not extend it to preclude inheriting 'Sh'vach she'Shavchu Nechasim le'Achar Miysah' (like the Rabbanan)?

(d) What do the Rabbanan then learn from "Pi Shenayim"?

(a) What does Rav Papa say about a date-palm which grew thicker and land that threw up a layer of slime after the heirs inherited it, fertilizing and improving the quality of the soil?

(b) The Chachamim argue with Rebbi, he says, in a case of 'Chafurah va'Havah Shuvli' and 'Sheluf'fi va'Havah Tamri'.
What is ...

  1. ... 'Chafurah va'Havah Shuvli'?
  2. ... 'Sheluf'fi va'Havah Tamri'?
(c) What makes this worse than the previous case, according to the Chachamim?

(d) On what grounds does Rebbi argue?

Answers to questions



(a) 'Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Chiya Asah ke'Divrei Rebbi Asah, Asah ke'Divrei Chachamim Asah'.
Why is that? What is he uncertain about?

(b) Rav Nachman Amar Rav 'Asur La'asos ke'Divrei Rebbi'.
What does Rav Nachman himself say? What is the basis of their Machlokes?

(c) Why did Rav say 'Asur La'asos ke'Divrei Rebbi' (and not 'Ein Halachah ke'Rebbi')?

(d) Rava holds like Rav, only he adds 've'Im Asah, Asuy'.
Why is that?

(a) What is the difference between 'Sifra (de'Bei Rav)' and 'Sha'ar Sifri (de'Bei Rav)'?

(b) If 'S'tam Mishnah is Rebbi Meir' and 'Stam Sifra, Rebbi Yehudah', who is the author of ...

  1. ... the Sifri?
  2. ... Seder Olam?
  3. ... Tosefta?
(c) Who was the Rebbe of them all?
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei (with regard to the inheritance of a Bechor) - "be'Chol Asher Yimatzei Lo"?

(b) When Rav Nachman, citing the Sifri, precludes from there 'Sh'vach she'Hishbichu Yorshin le'Achar Miysas Avihen', what does he not preclude?
Who is then the author of this ruling?

(c) How does Rami bar Chama quote the Sifri? Who is the author of the Beraisa according to him?

(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel states 'Ein Bechor Notel Pi Shenayim be'Milveh'.
Why do we initially think that Shmuel must follow the opinion of Rebbi and not the Rabbanan? Is the Tana talking about an oral loan or even a Milveh bi'Sh'tar?

(b) What problem does this create with the Beraisa 'Yarshu Sh'tar-Chov, Bechor Notel Pi Shenayim, Bein be'Milveh Bein be'Ribis'?

(c) How do we therefore establish Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel's statement according to the Rabbanan? What will be the Chidush, even according to them?

(d) What does the Tana mean when he refers to a Sh'tar with Ribis? Since when is such a Sh'tar Kasher?

(a) They sent from Eretz Yisrael 'Bechor Notel Pi Shenayim be'Milveh Aval Lo be'Ribis'.
Why can the Shalchu mi'Tam not hold like Rebbi?

(b) If, as we therefore conclude, they hold like the Rabbanan, how do we reconcile this with the Rabbanan's earlier ruling that the Bechor does not even receive 'Sh'vach she'Shavchu Nechasim' (such as Shachas that grew into wheat), how much more so a Milveh, where the heirs initially own nothing but a piece of paper?

(c) Why does this S'vara work for the loan itself, but not for the Ribis?

(d) How do we reconcile this with Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel?

(a) Rav Acha bar Rava told Ravina that Ameimar arrived in their place and ruled like Shalchu mi'Tam.
Based on the fact that Ameimar was from Neherda'a, what did Ravina retort?

(b) What did Rav Nachman mean when he said 'Gavu Karka Ein Lo, Gavu Ma'os Yesh Lo'?

(c) What is his reason for this?

(d) And what is the reasoning of Rabah, who holds the reverse?

(a) Seeing as Ameimar does not appear in the previous Machlokes, what did Ravina mean when he said 'Neherda'i le'Ta'amaihu'?

(b) Does that mean that Ameimar holds like Rav Nachman and not like Rabah?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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