(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 Metzia 102

BAVA METZIA 101-105 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.


(a) Under which circumstances does the Beraisa permit the hirer to take his Mezuzah with him when he leaves the apartment?

(b) What happened to a certain hirer who took down his Mezuzah upon leaving the apartment?

(c) How come the Tana cites this incident after having taught us the concession of taking down one's Mezuzah should a Nochri rent the apartment after him? Why did he cite an incident which contradicts the Halachah?

(a) We learned in our Mishnah that the droppings in the courtyard belongs to the owner.
Whose is the Chatzer (is it rented to the hirer)? Whose oxen dropped the droppings?

(b) The Chidush coincides with a statement of Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina. What did Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina say about a person's Chatzer?

(c) How will Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina explain the Beraisa 'Kol Metzi'os she'Yava'o le'Tocho ha'Yom, Tikneh Li Chatzeri, Lo Amar K'lum'?

(d) Then how will he account for the Seifa 'Yatza Lo Shem Metzi'a ba'Ir, Devarav Kayamin'?

(a) Another Beraisa declares the droppings that he finds in the oven and those that he collects in a vessel from the air in the Chatzer (as it drops from the animal) to be the hirer's.
What does the Tana say about the droppings that the hirer finds in the stable or in the Chatzer?

(b) To reconcile Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina with the middle Din (of droppings in the air, which ought to belong to the owner, according to him), Abaye establishes the Beraisa when the hirer places his vessel right next to the cow, so that the droppings fall immediately into it.
What does Rava say?

(c) What did Rava himself (in the first Perek) ask regarding someone who throws a Hefker purse through the front door of a house, and the purse flies through the house and out the back door?

(d) How will we reconcile his current statement (where he is sure) with that She'eilah (where he is not)?

(a) Why does the Tana of the Beraisa find it necessary to teach us that both the droppings in the Chatzer and in the stable belong to the owner? Why will one of them not suffice (See also Tosfos DH 'Tarti')?

(b) What does Rav Ashi extrapolate from the fact that the Tana presents the case of 'Refes she'ba'Chatzer', and not that of 'she'be'Chatzer' alone?

(c) What does the Tana of yet another Beraisa say about the birds that one finds in somebody's dovecote as regards ...

  1. ... the Mitzvah of Shilu'ach ha'Ken?
  2. ... the Aveirah of Gezel?
(d) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei (in connection with Shilu'ach ha'Ken) "Ki Yikarei" which appears to clash with this ruling according to Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina?
(a) Rava replies that the Tana is speaking when most of the egg has emerged from the chicken, but not all of it.
How does that answer the Kashya?

(b) We suggest that, if that is so, 'Chayavos Mishum Gezel' refers (not to the eggs, but) to the mother.
Why does the owner acquire it because of Darkei Shalom? Why not min ha'Torah?

(c) How might the Tana be referring even to the eggs?

(a) Alternatively, we establish the Beraisa even when the eggs are already lying in the Chatzer, yet the owner still does not acquire them.
What does Rav Yehudah Amar Rav learn from the Pasuk there "Shale'ach Teshalach es ha'Eim (ve'Hadar) ve'es ha'Banim Tikach Lach", that will explain this?

(b) So the Tana must therefore be speaking when the owner of the Chatzer has not yet sent the mother away. In that case, why does he acquire the eggs even because of Darkei Shalom, seeing as he is bound by the Mitzvah to send the mother away? To whom must the Beraisa therefore be referring?

(c) Since when is a Katan subject to Darkei Shalom?

(a) If Reuven rents his Chatzer to Shimon for a year, and it turns out to be a leap year, who gains the extra month, according to the Tana Kama of our Mishnah?

(b) What did Raban Shimon ben Gamliel and Rebbi Yossi there rule in a case that occurred in Tzipori, when someone hired a bath-house at twelve golden Dinrim per annum, one Dinar per month?

Answers to questions



(a) How do we reconcile the Seifa of our Mishnah, where the episode brought there clashes with the Reisha, which grants the right of the thirteenth month to the hirer?

(b) On what basis would Rav, had he been there, have given the rights of the thirteenth month entirely to the owner in the Seifa?

(c) What do we then ask on Rav?

(a) What did Rav rule in a case where someone agrees to pay for a certain article ...
  1. ... 'Astira Me'ah Ma'i'?
  2. ... 'Me'ah Ma'i Astira'?
(b) How much is ...
  1. ... an Astira?
  2. ... a Ma'ah (in this Sugya)?
(c) If the reason there had not been because of 'T'fos Lashon Acharon', then what would it have been?

(d) What would the owner then have meant when he said ...

  1. ... 'Astira Me'ah Ma'i'?
  2. ... 'Me'ah Ma'i Astira'?
(a) Shmuel establishes the Seifa of our Mishnah when the owner comes in the middle of the thirteenth month and asks the hirer to leave.
What would be the Din if he came ...
  1. ... at the beginning of the month?
  2. ... at the end of the month?
(b) Shmuel is uncertain whether 'T'fos Lashon Rishon' or 'T'fos Lashon Acharon'.
What is then his reason ...
  1. ... in our Mishnah?
  2. ... in each of the other two cases?
(c) What do Rav and Shmuel say in a case where Reuven sells Shimon a Kur of wheat ...
  1. ... for thirty Sela'im? Up to which point does Reuven have the right to retract?
  2. ... for thirty Sela'im, but adds 'Sa'ah be'Sela'?
(d) Is this not a proof that Shmuel agrees with Rav and holds 'T'fos Lashon Acharon'?
(a) Rav Nachman rules that 'Karka be'Chezkas Ba'alehah Omedes' (meaning that the law is on the side of the owner).
Does this mean that he agrees with Rav (who holds 'T'fos Lashon Acharon')?

(b) What will Rav Nachman hold if the owner comes only at the end of the month? Can he claim the rental for the thirteenth month?

(a) They asked Rebbi Yanai what the Din will be if the hirer claims to have paid his rental, and the owner countered that he has not. This She'eilah pertain neither to the middle of the term of rental nor to after its termination, because both of these cases are already contained in a Mishnah. To which case then, does the She'eilah pertain?

(b) What does the Mishnah in Bechoros say about a Bechor whose father died ...

  1. ... before the thirty-first day?
  2. ... after that?
(c) Under which circumstances will the Bechor in the latter case be obligated to redeem himself when he grows up?

(d) What are the two sides of the She'eilah they asked Rebbi Yanai?

(a) Rebbi Yochanan resolved the She'eilah from a Mishnah in the next Perek. What does the Tana say there about an employee who claims on the day that his contract terminates, that he has not yet been paid, and the employer counters that he paid earlier?

(b) Why does the employee swear and not the employer, as is normally the case (as we learned earlier)?

(c) How does Rebbi Yochanan resolve the She'eilah from there?

(d) What sort of Shevu'ah is Rebbi Yochanan referring to?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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