POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
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 67
1) MISTAKEN PARDON
(a) Question (Rava): Ona'ah is mistaken pardon, and it is not
2) DEDUCTING FROM MASHKANTA
1. Counter-question (Rav Nachman): From a Mishnah of
Ailonis, we see that mistaken pardon helps!
(b) Rejection: Neither of these is a support or refutation.
2. (Mishnah): A girl that does Mi'un, a Sheniyah (a
woman forbidden to her husband mid'Rabanan) or an
Ailonis - do not receive a Kesuvah, produce (that
her husband ate from her land), food, the
depreciation of (Tosfos; Rashi - remnants of) her
Tzon Barzel property. (The Ailonis let her husband
eat the fruit, unaware that she was an Ailonis and
they are not really married, and he need not return
1. Regarding Ona'ah, the victim did not intend to
pardon anything - he did not know he overpaid!
(c) Leah told Reuven 'Go buy land for me from my relative';
the seller said, 'If I get money, she should let me by it
2. A woman is very happy to be called married - an
Ailonis would let her husband eat, even if she knew
that they are not really married!
1. Reuven: You are relatives (you will settle between
(d) Question: He gets back the land - what is the law of the
2. Version #1 (Rabah bar Rav Huna): The seller relied
on this stipulation.
3. Version #2 - Rambam - (Rabah bar Rav Huna): (Since
Reuven did not agree to the stipulation,) the seller
did not decide absolutely to sell.
1. It is fixed Ribis, and she must return it;
(e) Answer (Rabah bar Rav Huna): It is Avak Ribis, she need
not return it.
2. Or - it is Avak Ribis, she need not return it?
(a) Question (Abaye): Reuven lent Shimon and took his field
to be collateral, i.e. Mashkanta. If Reuven ate the
produce without any prior stipulation, what is the law?
1. As in the previous case, since there was no
stipulation, it is Avak Ribis, he need not return
(b) Answer (Rabah): Since there was no stipulation, it is
2. Or - perhaps there it was only Avak Ribis because it
was a sale, but here it was a loan, it is proper
(c) (Rav Papi): Ravina ruled in a case that the fruit returns
to the seller, unlike Rabah bar Rav Huna.
(d) (Mar brei d'Rav Yosef): In a place where the borrower can
redeem Mashkanta, if the lender ate as much produce as
the loan, the land reverts to the borrower;
1. If he ate more than the loan, he need not return it;
if the borrower owes him another debt, we do not
deduct the excess that he ate from the other debt.
(e) (Rav Ashi): Since we say that if he ate more, he need not
return it, if he ate the amount of the debt, we do not
remove him from the land.
2. Regarding orphans, if he ate more than the loan, he
must return it; if their father owed him another
debt, we deduct the excess he ate from it.
(f) Question: Why is this?
(g) Answer: To remove him without paying him money is
considered taking from him - we do not do this by Avak
(h) Rav Ashi ruled in a case of young orphans as if they were
not orphans (he did not remove the lender from the land).
(i) (Rava brei d'Rav Yosef): In a place where the borrower
can redeem his Mashkanta, the lender can only eat the
produce if he deducts (a fixed amount per year from the
3) MASHKANTA THAT CAN BE REDEEMED
1. A Chacham may not eat the produce even if he
(j) Question: How can a Chacham eat?
(k) Answer: Through Kitzusa (this will be explained).
(l) Question: We understand according to the opinion that
Kitzusa is permitted - but according to the opinion that
Kitzusa is forbidden, how can we answer?
1. (Rav Acha or Ravina): Kitzusa is permitted.
(m) Answer #1: According to Version #1, all agree that the
Kitzusa of Version #2 is permitted (even for a Chacham).
2. (The other of Rav Acha and Ravina): It is forbidden.
3. Version #1 - Question: What is Kitzusa?
4. Answer: The lender eats the produce for a specified
time without deducting anything; after this, he
evaluates all the produce he eats (and deducts it
from the loan).
5. Version #2: No one permits eating without deducting;
6. Version #1 - Question: What is Kitzusa (that they
7. Answer: The lender eats the produce for a specified
time, deducting a fixed amount per year; after this,
he deducts the value of all the produce he eats from
1. Question: According to Version #2, according to the
opinion that forbids Kitzusa, how may a Chacham eat?
(n) Answer #2: He writes Mashkanta of Sura - 'After such and
such years, the land reverts to the owner for free'.
(a) (Rav Papa and Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): In a place
where the borrower can redeem Mashkanta, (if the lender
dies, his) creditor does not collect from it (since it is
not considered land), his firstborn does not get a double
portion of it (it is a mere loan, not land);
1. Such a loan is cancelled in Shemitah (we do not
considered it a loan with a security);
(b) (Mar Zutra): In a place where the borrower can redeem
Mashkanta, the lender cannot even keep dates that fell on
mats under the trees;
2. In a place where the borrower cannot redeem it (we
consider it to be sold to the lender, therefore his)
creditor collects from it, his firstborn gets a
double portion of it, such a loan is not cancelled
1. If the lender picked them up to put them in baskets
(before he was repaid), he acquired them.
(c) Obviously, in a place where the borrower can redeem
Mashkanta, if he says (at the time of the loan) that he
will not, he cannot;
2. According to the opinion that a buyer's vessels
acquire for him in the seller's domain, he acquires
them without lifting them.
(d) Question: In a place where the borrower cannot redeem
Mashkanta, if he says (at the time of the loan) that he
will - must he make an acquisition for this?
(e) Answer #1 (Rav Papa): He does not need an acquisition.
(f) Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes brei d'Rav Idi): He needs an
(g) (In a place where the borrower can redeem) if he says
'Don't eat, I am going to fetch the money for you', the
lender may not eat (since the money is ready);
(h) (Ravina): If he says 'Don't eat, I am going to toil to
obtain the money', the lender may still eat;
(i) (Mar Zutra brei d'Rav Mari): He may not eat.
1. The Halachah follows Mar Zutra.
(j) Rav Kahana, Rav Papa and Rav Ashi would not eat through
deducting (a fixed amount per year); Ravina ate through
(k) (Mar Zutra): Ravina would eat, as we find by one who made
his inherited field Hekdesh: one who redeems it can eat
much produce for a fixed amount per year, (just over)
four Zuz a year;
1. Those that would not eat say that a loan is
different, for it looks like Ribis.