1)

TOSFOS DH AMRI EIN HEVEL LE'MISAH ETC.

úåñ' ã"ä àîøé àéï äáì ìîéúä ëå'

(Summary: Tosfos explains what the Makshan thought.)

åäî÷ùä äéä ñåáø ãìòðéï çáè ùééê ùôéø 'àéï çáè ìîéúä, àáì éù çáè ìðæ÷éï' ...

(a)

Clarification: The Makshan however, thought that although regarding 'Chavat' it is appropriate to say that although there is no Chavat regarding Misah, there is Chavat regarding Nizakin ...

àáì ìòðéï äáì äéä ñåáø ãàé éù äáì ìîéúä éù äáì ìðæ÷éï, åàé àéï äáì ìîéúä ìðæ÷éï ðîé àéï äáì.

1.

Clarification (cont.): ... regarding 'Hevel' we will say that, if there is Hevel regarding Misah, there is also Hevel regarding Nizakin.

2)

TOSFOS DH NA'AVID PECHUSAH ME'ASARAH

úåñ' ã"ä ðòáéã ôçåúä îòùøä

(Summary: Tosfos equates this with the Gemara in Chulin, which compares the 'T'reifos of a human-being with that of an animal.)

åäùúà îãîä èøéôåú ãàãí ìèøéôåú ãáäîä.

(a)

Clarification: And the Gemara now equates the T'reifos of a human-being with those of an animal.

åëï áàìå èøéôåú (çåìéï ãó îâ. åùí) ãîééúé øàéä îàéåá

1.

Precedent: And similarly in 'Eilu T'reifos' (Chulin, Daf 43a & 43b), where the Gemara brings a proof from Iyov (with regard to the T'reifos of an animal)..

å÷ùä ìø"ú ãîçì÷ áéðéäí?

(b)

Question: This poses a Kashya on Rabeinu Tam, who draws a distinction between them? (See Masores ha'Shas).

3)

TOSFOS DH BOR SHEL SH'NEI SHUTFIN HEICHI MASHACHAS LAH

úåñ' ã"ä áåø ùì ùðé ùåúôéï äéëé îùëçú ìä

(Summary: Tosfos cites two possible cases and refutes them.)

åìà áòé ìîéîø ùäô÷éøå øùåúï åáåøï ...

(a)

Implied Question #1: The Gemara does not want to answer that it speaks where they declared Hefker both their domains and their Boros ...

ãôèåø ìëåìé òìîà ...

(b)

Answer: ... where they would be Patur according to all opinions

ëãôøéùéú áäîðéç (ìòéì ãó ëç: åùí).

1.

Source: ... as Tosfos explained in 'ha'Meni'ach (above, Daf 28b & 29a)

åìà áòé ìîéîø ëâåï ùçôø æä òùøä åæä òùøéí ...

(c)

Implied Question #1: Nor does the Gemara want to answer that it speaks where the one dug a pit of ten Tefachim, and the other, a pit of twenty ...

ãàîø ì÷îï ãëåìí çééáéï ...

1.

Source: ... since the Gemara says later on Amud Beis) that, in such a case, they are all Chayav.

ãà'áåø òùøä' ãîúðéúéï ÷àé.

(d)

Answer: ... since it is referring to the 'pit of ten Tefachim' mentioned in our Mishnah.

4)

TOSFOS DH HA'ACHARON CHAYAV

úåñ' ã"ä äàçøåï çééá

(Summary: Tosfos explains why the Tana mentions specifically nine and ten Tefachim.)

ãå÷à äåà, áùáéì ùçéãù îéúä ùìà äéä îúçéìä ...

(a)

Clarification: Specifically where one digs nine Tefachim, and the other, ten ...

àáì øàùåï ç' åæä è', ëåìí çééáéï áðæ÷éï ëîå æä é' åæä òùøéí.

1.

Clarification (cont.): ... but where the first one digs eight, and the second one, nine, they are both liable for damages, just like where one digs ten and the other, twenty.

5)

TOSFOS DH BOR ASARAH UBA ACHER VE'HIHLIMO LE'ESRIM

úåñ' ã"ä áåø é' åáà àçø åäùìéîå ìòùøéí

(Summary: Tosfos explains how, by virtue of the course of the Sugya, the same will apply if thr second one extended the pit to only eleven Tefachim.)

åäåà äãéï ìé"à ...

(a)

Clarification: The same will apply if it is only eleven Tefachim ...

ìîàé ãôøéê òìä îñééã åëééã, åîùðé äà øáé åäà øáðï.

1.

Source: ... according to the Gemara which asks from 'Sayad ve'Kayad'. And it answers that one Beraisa (the second one) goes like the Rabanan, and the other (the current) one like Rebbi.

51b----------------------------------------51b

6)

TOSFOS DH SHE'LO HAYAH BO LE'MISAH

úåñ' ã"ä ùìà äéä áå äáì ìîéúä

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies the statement.)

ùäéä øçáå éåúø îòî÷å.

(a)

Clarification: Because its width exceeded its depth.

7)

TOSFOS DH I BE'HAVLA MAYIS

úåñ' ã"ä àé áäáìà îééú

(Summary: Tosfos queries the leniency implied by the question.)

äøáä äåà úéîä, ãðäé ãîéòè äáìà, îëì î÷åí àí ìà ãäøçéá ìà äéä ðåôì.

(a)

Question: This is very difficult, since, granted, he diminished the foul air, yet had he not widened the pit, the ox would not have fallen in?

8)

TOSFOS DH HA'SHUTFIN SHE'NADRU HANA'AH ZEH MI'ZEH ASURIM LIKANEIS BE'CHATZER

úåñ' ã"ä äùåúôéï ùðãøå äðàä æä îæä àñåøéí ìéëðñ áçöø

(Summary: Tosfos reconciles the Sugya in Nedarim's explanation of this Beraisa with the Sugya in Erchin, which seem to argue over whether partners can forbid one another Hana'ah regarding a Chatzer that is too small to divide.)

áðãøéí (ãó îå:) îôøù 'áéï éù áä ãéï çìå÷ä åáéï àéï áä ãéï çìå÷ä, àñåøéí'.

(a)

Clarification: The Gemara in Nedarim (Daf 46b) explains that the Isur applies irrespective of whether the Chatzer is divisible or not.

åàò"ô ùàéï éëåì ìîçåú ìéëðñ, ëùàéï áå ãéï çìå÷ä?

(b)

Implied Question: Even though, if it is not, he cannot stop the Nidar from entering it ...

î"î, éëåì ìàñåø òìéå ...

(c)

Answer: ... he can nevertheless declare it Asur on him.

îéãé ãäåé à'îùëéø áéú ìçáéøå', ùéëåì äîùëéø ìä÷ãéù ...

(d)

Precedent: Like in the case of someone who rents his friend a house, where the owner can declare it Hekdesh ...

ëãàéúà áîñëú òøëéï - áô' äàåîø îù÷ìé (ãó ëà. åùí), àò"ô ùàéï éëåì ìîçåú áéã äùåëø ùìà ìéëðñ.

1.

Source: ... as the Gemara explains in Erchin (Daf 21a & 21b), even though he cannot stop the hirer from entering it.

åà"ú, åî"ù îá"ç, ãàúé åù÷éì àôé' ä÷ãéù ùãäå? ...

(e)

Question: Why is this (a Socher) different than a creditor, who is able to come and take the field that is Meshubad to him, even if the owner (the debtor) declared it Hekdesh? ...

àìà îùåí ãø' àáäå îåñéó ãéðø - ùìà éàîø ... ' (ùí ãó ëâ:)?

1.

Reservation: ... and it is only on account of Rebbi Avahu ('because people might say that Hekdesh goes out to Chulin without redemption) that he is obligated to pay a Dinar to Hekdesh.

åé"ì, ãùàðé á"ç, ãâåó ä÷ø÷ò éåöà îúçú éã äî÷ãéù, àáì âáé ùåëø ìòåìí àéï âåó ä÷ø÷ò éåöà îúçú éã äîùëéø.

(f)

Answer: A creditor is different, inasmuch as the actual land leaves the domain of the owner, whereas in the case of the Socher, the Chatzer does not leave the domain of the Maskir.

9)

TOSFOS DH ZEH NICHNAS BE'TOCH SHE'LO

úåñ' ã"ä æä ðëðñ áúåê ùìå

(Summary: Tosfos reconciles this Sugya with the Sugya in Megilah which seem to argue over whether walking in someone's domain is forbidden to a Mudar Hana'ah.)

äùúà îùîò ããøéñú äøâì àñåø áîåãø äðàä ...

(a)

Inference: From here it appears that 'D'risas ha'Regel (treading of the foot) is forbidden in an area that is Asur be'Hana'ah.

åàôéìå ø"à áï éò÷á ìà ùøé àìà ùåúôéï îùåí ãáùìå ðëðñ, àáì áìà ùåúôéí îåãä ãàñåø, ã÷ôãé à'ãøéñú øâì ...

1.

Inference (extension): And even Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov only permits it with regard to partners, seeing as whoever enters, enters his own property ...

ëãîùîò áñåó çæ÷ú äáúéí (á"á ãó ðæ: åùí).

2.

Source: ... as is implied at the end of Chezkas ha'Batim (Bava Basra, Daf 57b [See Tosfos there DH 'Ravina']).

å÷ùä, ãáô"÷ ãîâéìä (ãó ç. åùí) úðï 'àéï áéï äîåãø äðàä îçáéøå ìîåãø îîðå îàëì àìà ãøéñú øâì åëìéí ùàéï òåùéï áäï àåëì ðôù ...

(b)

Question: In the first Perek of Megilah (Daf 8a [See Tosfos there DH 'D'risas']), the Mishnah lists the only differences between someone who is Mudar Hana'ah from his friend and someone who is Mudar not to eat from his food as D'risas ha'Regel and vessels that are not used for food ...

åôøéê áâîøà 'ãøéñú äøâì äà ìà ÷ôãé'. åîàé ÷ôøéê, äà îùîò äëà ã÷ôãé?

1.

Inference (cont.): ... which the Gemara queries in that people tend not to be particular about D'risas ha'Regel. But according to our Gemara, people are particular, so what is the Gemara there asking?

åîôøù ø"ú, ãäëé ôøéê äúí, ãò"ë áãøéñú äøâì ãìà ÷ôãéæ, ëîå áá÷òä îééøé ...

(c)

Answer: Rabeinu Tam explains that the Gemara there is talking about D'risas ha'Regel about which people are not fussy, such as a valley ...

ãàé áääéà ã÷ôãé ëâåï áçöø, à"ë àôé' ðåãø äéîðå îàëì éäà àñåø, ëéåï ã÷ôãé, à"ë ëéåöà áå îùëéøéï ...

1.

Proof: ... because if it was a piece of land about which they were fussy, such as a Chatzer, then if it was Mudar Hana'ah regarding food, it should be Asur, seeing as they are fussy, in which case, since it is a sort of location which one tends to rent out ...

åúðï áðãøéí áô' àéï áéï äîåãø (ãó ìâ.) 'åëì ãáø ùàéï òåùä áå àåëì ðôù, î÷åí ùîùëéøéï ëéåöà áå, àñåø'.

2.

Source: ... and we learned in the Mishnah in Nedarim (in Perek Ein bein ha'Mudart, Daf 33a) that whatever is not used for food, in a place where one rents out similar items, is Asur.

åëéåï ãìà ÷ôãé, àîàé àñåø?

(d)

Answer (concl.): ... and since they are not fussy, why is it Asur?

åäåà äãéï ãäåä îöé ìîéîø 'ëìéí, 'äà ìà ÷ôãé?'.

(e)

Alternative: The Gemara could just as well have asked on Keilim 'Ha Lo Kapdi?'