(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 170


(a) The Beraisa discusses a case where Reuven counters Shimon's claim that Reuven stole his field with a Sh'tar and a Chazakah. According to Rebbi, we only contend with the Sh'tar.
What does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say?

(b) On what grounds do we reject the text in Raban Shimon ben Gamliel 'Af be'Chazakah'?

(c) According to Rav Dimi, their Machlokes is based on the principle 'Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah'.
What does each Tana hold (see Rabeinu Gershom)?

(d) Can one acquire a field with a Sh'tar, according to Raban Shimon ben Gamliel?

(a) What did Rav Dimi reply when Abaye asked him whether his interpretation did not clash with Rabah, in whose opinion Raban Shimon ben Gamliel holds 'Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah'?

(b) Why did Abaye not accept Rav Dimi's answer?

(c) So Abaye establishes the Machlokes when one of the witnesses turned out to be a relative or Pasul. What is then the Machlokes? Why does Rebbi nevertheless go by the Sh'tar?

(d) What will both Tana'im hold with regard to 'Osiyos ... '?

(a) We reject this however, on the basis of a statement by Rebbi Elazar (the Tana) himself What did Rebbi Elazar say about a Sh'tar that is 'intrinsically a forgery'?

(b) So how does Rebbi Avina establish the Machlokes, so that they still argue over Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Meir?

(c) Alternatively, they argue over a Sh'tar which the 'seller' admits to having written, and the basis of their Machlokes is - whether the 'purchaser' subsequently needs to corroborate the Sh'tar (Rebbi) or not (Raban Shimon ben Gamliel).

(d) What is the S'vara behind Raban Shimon ben Gamliel's ruling? Why does he not apply the principle 'ha'Peh she'Asar Hu ha'Peh she'Hitir' (and believe the 'seller' that although he wrote the Sh'tar, the sale did not take place)?

(a) Rebbi holds in a Beraisa, that if a creditor and a debtor are holding the Sh'tar Halva'ah, which the creditor claims he lost before the debtor had paid, and the debtor claims that he lost after having paid, 'Yiskayem ha'Sh'tar be'Chosamav'.
What does this mean?

(b) What does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say?

(c) What do we ask on Rebbi from 'Shenayim Ochzin be'Talis'?

(a) Rava Amar Rav Nachman therefore explains that had the Sh'tar been verified, even Rebbi would agree that the creditor would claim half the debt.
How does the Beraisa then speak? What is Rebbi's reason?

(b) How do we now resolve the discrepancy, seeing as Rebbi and Raban Shimon ben Gamliel appear to have switched opinions?

(a) Alternatively, we establish the Machlokes in the latter Beraisa 'bi'Le'varer ka'Miflegi'.
What does this mean?

(b) And we support this with a case of Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef who lent Rebbi Aba money.
What did Rebbi Yitzchak Nafcha rule when the latter claimed to have paid in front of P'loni u'Peloni u'Peloni?

(c) The defendant queried this however, from an established ruling.
What do we rule in a case of 'ha'Malveh es Chavero be'Eidim ... '?

(a) In reply, Rebbi Yitzchak Nafcha quoted *Rebbi Aba* Amar Rav Ada bar Ahavah Amar Rav.
What did Rebbi Aba himself say in a case where the debtor claims that he paid in the presence of P'loni u'P'loni u'Peloni?

(b) With whose opinion does this conform?

(c) Rebbi Aba objected to Rebbi Yitzchak Nafcha's ruling from a statement by Rav Gidal Amar Rav.
Like whom did he rule?

(a) What did Rebbi Yitzchak Nafcha reply? With whose opinion did his ruling conform?

(b) Like whom do we ultimately rule?

Answers to questions



(a) Our Mishnah discusses someone who paid part of his debt. What is the problem?

(b) Rebbi Yehudah holds 'Yachlif'.
What does that mean?

(c) What does Rebbi Yossi say?

(d) How does Rebbi Yossi counter Rebbi Yehudah's argument that it would not be fair to expect the debtor to look after a receipt, to prevent it from falling into the hands of the mice?

10) What is the basis of Rebbi Yossi's opinion?


(a) Rav disagrees with both Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Yossi.
Since when does an Amora have the right to argue with Tana'im?

(b) What did Rav Nachman (or Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba) comment to Rav Huna with regard to Rav, after quoting the Beraisa 'Eidim Mekar'in es ha'Sh'tar ve'Kosvin Lo Sh'tar Acher mi'Z'man Rishon' (though this is not the actual wording of the Beraisa as we shall see)?

(c) What did Rav Huna reply?

(a) What does Rav Yehudah Amar Rav mean when he said 'Eidim Kosvin Afilu Asarah Sh'taros al Sadeh Achas'? What is the point of so many Sh'taros?

(b) To answer the apparent contradiction in Rav, Rav Yosef establishes Rav's latter statement by a Sh'tar Matanah.
How does that answer the Kashya?

(c) How does Rabah establish Rav's latter statement?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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