(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 173


(a) We learned in our Mishnah that if there are two Yosef ben Shimons in town, they are permitted to produce a Sh'tar against a third person, and we establish the Machlokes between the Tana of our Mishnah and the Tana of the Beraisa, who says that they are not, with regard to 'Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah'.
What does each Tana hold?

(b) Is there any way round the Beraisa's prohibition?

(c) Why can they not argue over whether we suspect that the owner lost his Sh'tar or not?

(a) Alternatively, they argue over the same Machlokes as Abaye and Rava, who both hold 'Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah'.
What is then the basis of their Machlokes?

(b) Rava holds 'Eino Tzarich Le'havi Re'ayah', Abaye holds 'Tzarich ... '. What is Abaye's reason? What are we are otherwise afraid of?

(a) Abaye proves his opinion from a Beraisa, which obligates one of the brothers who produces a Sh'tar-Chov and claims that his brothers handed it to him, to prove his claim.
What sort of Sh'tar-Chov are we talking about?

(b) On what grounds does Rava refute Abaye's proof? Why might a case of brothers be different?

(c) In the second Lashon, Rava proves his opinion from the very same Beraisa.
How does he do that?

(d) According to this Lashon, how does Abaye then refute Rava's proof? Why did the Tana find it necessary to present the case of brothers, according to him?

4) A third Beraisa permits even the two Yosef ben Shimons to produce a Sh'tar-Chov against one another.
Why is that? In which point does this Tana argue with the Tana of our Mishnah?


(a) Our Mishnah discusses a case where a third person finds a receipt among his documents, stating that Yosef ben Shimon's debt is paid.
How does Rav Hoshaya establish the Beraisa to reconcile it with the Mishnah, which prohibits a third person from producing a Sh'tar-Chov on either Yosef ben Shimon?

(b) In that case, why do we not inspect the third name on the receipt?

(c) Abaye amends the Beraisa to read 'Nimtza le'Loveh Bein Sh'tarosav ... '. What is the Beraisa now teaching us?

(d) We learned in our Mishnah that if their identification marks are the same, they write Kohen or Levi.
What if they are both Kohanim or Levi'im?

(a) What does our Mishnah say in a case where a Shechiv-Mera declares that one of his Sh'tarei-Chov has already been paid?

(b) And what will be the Din in the event that they then discover two Sh'tarei-Chov (of different amounts) among his documents, against one debtor?

(a) What does Rava say about someone who says ...
  1. ... 'Sh'tar Lach be'Yadi Paru'a'?
  2. ... 'Chov Lach be'Yadi Paru'a'?
(b) What might be the equivalent distinction in a case where Reuven says to Shimon 'Sadi Mechurah Lach' or 'Sadeh she'Yesh Li Mechurah Lach'?

(c) Why should we even think that 'Sadeh she'Yesh Li' incorporates many fields?

(d) Ravina asked Rav Ashi whether, based on Rava's first statement, this was in fact, the case.
What did Rav Ashi reply?

Answers to questions



(a) In a case where Reuven lends Shimon via an Areiv, what distinction does the Tana draw between whether he lends him S'tam, or whether he adds al-M'nas she'Epara mi'Mi she'Ertzeh'?

(b) Under which circumstances does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel forbid Reuven to go straight to the Areiv, even in the latter case?

(c) What does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say about a man who wants to divorce his wife, and there is an Areiv on her Kesuvah?

(d) What is the reason for this?

(a) What do we mean when we ask on the Din in our Mishnah ' ... Lo Yipara min ha'Areiv' Mai Ta'ama? How do we initially interpret the Mishnah?

(b) And what do Rabah and Rav Yosef then mean when they answer with 'Gavra Ashleimis Li, Gavra Ashlimi Lach'?

(c) Considering that the Persians would claim from the Areiv at all costs, what did Rav Nachman mean when he asked 'Hai Diyna de'Parsa'i'?

(d) So how does Rav Nachman interpret ' ... Lo Yipara min ha'Areiv'?

(e) How do we know that Rav Nachman's interpretation is correct?

(a) What does Rav Huna attempt to learn from Yehudah's words (quoted in Mikeitz) "Anochi E'ervenu, mi'Yadi Tevakshenu"?

(b) Rav Chisda refutes Rav Huna's proof however, on the basis of the Pasuk "Tenah Oso al-Yadi, va'Ani Ashivenu".
What is the gist of his objection?

(c) So Rebbi Yitzchak learns it from the Pasuk in Mishlei "L'kach Bigdo ki Arav Zar ... ".
What does another Pasuk in Mishlei advise someone to do if he ...

  1. ... undertook to be an Areiv?
  2. ... insulted someone?
(a) What does Ameimar mean when he connects the question whether an Areiv is Meshubad or not to a Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Yossi? Which Machlokes is he referring to?

(b) On what grounds does Rav Ashi query Ameimar?

(c) So why will even Rebbi Yehudah (who holds Asmachta Lo Kanya) agree that an Areiv is Meshubad?

(a) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel in our Mishnah forbids a creditor to claim from the Areiv as long as the debtor has property.
What do we assume, does the Tana Kama hold?

(b) What does Rabah bar bar Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about a creditor claiming from the Areiv if the debtor has property?

(c) How do we amend our Mishnah in light of Rebbi Yochanan's ruling, to prevent it from clashing with the Tana Kama? What in fact, is the Machlokes between Raban Shimon ben Gamliel and the Tana Kama?

(d) Bearing in mind Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan's statement 'Kol Makom she'Shanah Raban Shimon ben Gamliel be'Mishnaseinu, Halachah Kamoso ... ', why does he rule like the Tana Kama in this case? How does his statement end?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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