(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 P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Bava Metzia 35

1) THE QUESTION (continuation)

(a) Formulation of question: According to Rav Huna, Reuven must swear that it is not in his premises - how could he then show it?!
(b) Answer #1 (Rava): Witnesses testified that the collateral was burned (so we did not make Reuven swear).
(c) Objection: If so, there is no concern that Reuven will show the collateral!
(d) Answer #2 (Rav Yosef): Rather, witnesses testified that the collateral was stolen.
(e) Question: Also here, there is no concern that Reuven will show the collateral!
(f) Answer: Reuven will toil to track it down to show that Shimon swore falsely.
(g) Question: If so, even (in the last case) when Reuven swears, we should be concerned that Shimon will track it down to show that Reuven swore falsely!
(h) Answer: It was stolen from Reuven's house - Reuven knows who was in his house, he can track down the thief, but Shimon does not know who was in Reuven's house, he cannot track him down.
(i) Answer #3 (Abaye): The concern of the Mishnah is that Reuven will later say 'After I swore, I found it', and he will show that Shimon swore falsely.
(j) Answer #4 (Rav Ashi): (The question was based on a misunderstanding - the last clause of the Mishnah does not teach that Chachamim removed the oath from Shimon and imposed it on Reuven -) rather, Shimon swears mid'Oraisa, and Reuven swears on account of Rav Huna's concern. The Mishnah teaches that Reuven swears first, for if Shimon would swear first, perhaps Reuven would show the collateral and prove that Shimon swore falsely.
(k) Question (Rav Huna bar Tachlifa - Mishnah): If Shimon says 'I borrowed one Sela, the collateral was worth two - you must pay me one' and Reuven says that the loan and collateral were both worth one, Reuven need not swear.
1. According to Rav Huna, Reuven must swear that he does not have the collateral - through Gilgul, Shimon can also make him swear how much it was worth!
(l) Answer (Rav Kahana): The case is, Shimon trusts Reuven that he lost the collateral, he exempts him from Rav Huna's oath.
(m) Question: If he trusts him, he should also trust him regarding its value!
(n) Answer: Shimon reasons, Reuven did not look so carefully to see its value.
(o) Question: Reuven should trust Shimon, for Shimon surely knows its value!
(p) Answer: Reuven does not trust Shimon at all.
(q) Question: Why does the Tana assume that the borrower trusts the lender, but not vice-versa?
(r) Answer: The borrower applies to the lender "Tumas Yesharim Tanchem (the purity of the straight guides them)", the lender applies to the borrower "V'Selef Bogedim Yeshadem" (the crookedness of the betrayers makes them steal).
(a) Reuven deposited nose rings by Shimon; when he claimed them, Shimon said he forgot where he put them.
(b) Rav Nachman: That is negligence, Shimon must pay.
(c) Shimon did not pay; Rav Nachman gave Shimon's yard to Reuven as payment. Later, they were found; they had risen in value.
(d) Rav Nachman: Reuven gets his rings back, and Shimon gets his yard back.
(e) Rava: We were learning this Perek at the time. I asked Rav Nachman (from the Mishnah) 'If Shimon paid and did not want to swear...' - he did not answer;
1. Justifiably, he did not answer me! There (Reuven wants Shimon to acquire the deposit, and double payment if the thief is found) because Shimon did not force Reuven to go to Beis Din; here, Reuven is upset that he had to go to Beis Din to get paid, he does not want Shimon to acquire.
(f) Suggestion: We learn from this that Rav Nachman says that when property is collected to pay a debt, if the debtor later pays money, he receives back his property.
(g) Rejection: No - the yard was collected by mistake, for the rings were never lost.
(h) (Chachamim of Nehardai): A debtor whose property was collected to pay a debt, he has 12 months to pay the debt and get back his property.
(i) (Ameimar): I am from Nehardai - I hold, he can always redeem his property!
(j) The Halachah is, the lender can always redeem his property,(Chachamim enacted this) based on "v'Asisa ha'Tov v'haYashar (you will do what is straight and good)."
(k) Clearly, if Reuven collected Shimon's field, and Levi collected it from Reuven, Levi has no more right to keep it than Reuven (i.e. Shimon can buy it back from Levi);
1. If Reuven collected Shimon's field, and then sold, gave or bequeathed it to Levi - Levi wanted land, not money (Shimon cannot force Levi to sell it).
2. If Leah collected Shimon's field and then married Levi, or if Reuven collected Leah's field and then she married Levi and she died - a husband is like a buyer (regarding his wife's property), the original owner has no right to buy back the field.
i. (R. Yosi bar Chanina): In Usha, they enacted that a married woman who sold her Melug property and then died, her husband takes it back from the buyers (we consider him to be a previous buyer, from the time he married her).

(l) (Rav Acha or Ravina): If Shimon willingly gave Reuven his field (to pay his debt), Shimon can later pay money and take back his field.
(m) (The other of Rav Acha and Ravina): Shimon has no right to get back his field.
1. The latter opinion considers collection of the field like a sale, for he willingly gave it;
2. The first opinion says that Shimon did not want to give it - he gave it to avoid the embarrassment of going to Beis Din.
(n) Question: When may the lender eat the produce of the land he collected?
(o) Answer #1 (Rabah): From when he receives the Adrachta.
(p) Answer #2 (Abaye): (From the day the Adrachta is signed) - when witnesses sign a document, the receiver acquires immediately.
(q) Answer #3 (Rava): When the days of announcement (to sell the field) are over.
(a) (Mishnah): Reuven rented Shimon's cow, and lent it to Levi; it died normally.
1. Reuven swears that it died normally, and Levi pays Reuven;
2. R. Yosi says, one does not profit through another's property - rather, Levi pays Shimon.
(b) (Gemara - Rav Idi bar Avin) Question: Reuven (exempts himself, and thereby) acquires the cow through his oath - why can't Shimon say, 'Don't swear, I will demand my cow from Levi'?
(c) Answer (Abaye): Reuven does not acquires it through his oath, rather, through the death;
1. The oath is merely to placate the owner.
(d) (R. Zeira): Sometimes the owner pays multiple cows to the renter!
1. Reuven rented Shimon's cow for 100 days, and lent it back to Shimon for 90 days; Reuven rented it back for 80 days, and lent it back to Shimon for 70 days. It died during the 70 days - Shimon must pay a cow to Reuven for each time he borrowed it.
(e) Question (Rav Acha mi'Difti): It was the same cow that was rented and borrowed each time - it should suffice that Shimon pay 1 cow (and provide Reuven with a second cow to work with for the 20 days that the rentals cumulatively exceeded the borrowings)!
(f) Answer (Ravina): Indeed, if the cow was alive, it would suffice to return it (for the 20 days Shimon is entitled to work with it);
(g) (Mar bar Rav Ashi): Reuven never need return more than two cows, one for the borrowing, one for the rental;
1. The cow for the borrowing Shimon keeps; the cow for the rental he keeps for 20 days (as above).
Next daf


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