REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Basra 125
(a) Abaye queries both Rabah and Rav Nachman on two scores.
Kashya did he ask on both of them?
(b) Based on Rabah's own statement later (in connection with the case of the
old grandmother), why should even Karka be considered Ra'uy, even though it
(c) What does Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah say about Yesomim who
claimed Karka that was Meshubad to their father?
(d) How does Abaye ask from there on Rav Nachman's current opinion? What
would he have said had the Yesomim acquired Karka after their father's
(a) What did Rabah reply (to answer Abaye's Kashyos on Rav Nachman as well
as those on himself)?
(b) What do Rabah and Rav Nachman then really hold? Whose opinion do they
(c) If that is so, on what grounds do they qualify the Shalchu mi'Tam? How
do they know that they do not consider him Muchzak in both?
(a) If Rav Nachman really considers even Karka to be Ra'uy, on what basis
does he quote Rabah bar Avuhah, who permits the creditor of the Yesomim's
father to claim his debt from the property which the Yesomim claimed from
their father's debtor?
Answers to questions
(b) And how will we reconcile Rabah here, who considers the father Muchzak
in his debtor's Karka according to the Shalchu mi'Tam, with the Shalchu
mi'Tam, who, in the forthcoming case, consider the property Ra'uy, even
though it was Karka]).
Why was it not Meshubad to the husband?
(a) What did the owner of the property stipulate after bequeathing his
property to his old grandmother?
(b) Who claimed the property after the old woman died?
(c) On what grounds did ...
(d) What would Rav Anan have ruled had the daughter survived her husband,
and left a son or daughter when she died?
- ... Rav Huna uphold the husband's claim?
- ... Rav Anan disagree? Who ought have then to have inherited the property?
(a) What did Shalchu mi'Tam mean when they ruled like Rav Anan, but not for
the same reason?
(b) What are the ramifications of this ruling?
(c) What problem did this initially pose on Rav Huna?
(d) What did Rebbi Elazar mean when he said in answering this Kashya, 'Davar
Zeh Niftach bi'Gedolim, ve'Nistayem bi'Ketanim'? Whom did he mean by
'Gedolim' and 'Ketanim'?
(a) How did Rebbi Elazar explain Rav Huna, for the property not to have
(b) Nevertheless, Rabah, based on a S'vara that we have already discussed,
agrees with the B'nei Ma'arava (the Shalchu mi'Tam).
(c) Rav Papa issues a final ruling regarding the matters discussed in the
Which ruling effects a husband and a Bechor equally?
(d) What does he rule with regard to a Bechor receiving an extra portion in
a loan? Does it make a difference whether the heirs claimed land or money?
(a) Is Rav Papa's first ruling absolute? Is there any kind of Ra'uy that a
husband does inherit?
(b) Why is this obvious, despite the fact that the Rabbanan argue with Rebbi
over this point with regard to a Bechor?
(c) In which case will the Rabbanan anyway concede to Rebbi that even a
Bechor will inherit Ra'uy which grows from the object that one inherited?
(d) And in which case will Rav Papa agree that even a Bechor who has
brothers will receive an extra portion, despite the fact that it is Ra'uy?
(a) Rav Papa concludes 'Bechor she'Imo Palgi'.
Answers to questions
What is 'Bechor she'Imo'?
(b) What is the reason for this ruling?
(c) On what grounds might the Bechor's father be more Muchzak in this loan
than in a loan that he is owed by a third party?