BAVA KAMA 68 - Two weeks of study material have been dedicated by Ms. Estanne Fawer to honor the Yahrzeit of her father, Rav Mordechai ben Eliezer Zvi (Rabbi Morton Weiner) Z'L, who passed away on 18 Teves 5760. May the merit of supporting and advancing Dafyomi study -- which was so important to him -- during the weeks of his Yahrzeit serve as an Iluy for his Neshamah.

1)

TOSFOS DH I HACHI KASHAH METZI'ASA LE'RAV

úåñ' ã"ä àé äëé ÷ùä îöéòúà ìøá

(Summary: Tosfos explains why the Gemara does not simply switch the opinions.)

ãàéï ìäåôëå...

(a)

Refuted Answer: Since one cannot switch the opinions in the Beraisa ...

ëéåï ãáøééúà ìà îåëçà îéãé ùöøéê ìúøöä åìäôëä.

1.

Refutation: ... seeing as the Beraisa itself gives no indication of any problem that needs to be resolved in this way.

2)

TOSFOS DH MAH T'VICHAH DE'AHANU MA'ASAV (This Dibur belongs on Amu Beis).

úåñ' ã"ä îä èáéçä ãàäðå îòùéå

(Summary: Tosfos reconciles the opinion of the Rashbam's interpretation of a statement of Rebbi Elazar in the first Perek with the inference from Rebbi Elazar's statement here.)

îùîò ãñáø ø"à ã'ùéðåé ÷åðä ãàäðå îòùéå' îùîò - ìàôå÷é îøùåú áòìéí åì÷ðåúä, ãåîéà ã'àäðå îòùéå' ãîëéøä.

(a)

Inference: This implies that Rebbi Elazar interpret Shinuy Koneh because 'Ahanu Ma'asav' (what he did was effective) to mean that it takes it out of the owner's domain and to acquire it oneself, similar to 'Ahanu Ma'asav' with regard to selling.

å÷ùä ìôé' øùá"í ãîôøù áô"÷ (ã' éà.) à'äà ãàîø òåìà à"ø àìòæø 'ùîéï ìâðá åìâæìï' -ãäééðå ìòðéï ôçú ðáéìä ãäåé ãðâæì, îùåí ãìà ÷ðé ìä âæìï áùéðåé?

(b)

Question: This poses a Kashya on the Rashbam in the first Perek (on Daf 11a) where, in connection with the statement of Ula Amar Rebbi Elazar 'Shamin le'Ganav u'le'Gazlan' - he explains that this is with regard to the deterioration of the carcass which goes to the owner, since the Gazlan does not acquire it with Shinuy?

åé"ì, ããå÷à áùéðåé ùàéï äâæìï òåùä áéãéí ìà ÷ðé- ëâåï ùîúä äáäîä...

(c)

Answer #1: When he said that he does not acquire it with Shinuy, it is referring specifically to a Shinuy which the Gazlan did not perform with his hands - such as where the animal died ...

àáì ùéðåé ùòåùä äâæìï áéãéí -ëâåï èáéçä' îåãä ø"à ã÷ðé.

1.

Answer #1 (cont.): ... Rebbi Elazar concedes however, that a Shinuy which the Gazlan performs with his hands - such as Shechitah, acquires.

à"ð, àäðå îòùéå ãèáéçä äééðå ùîçñøä îï äáòìéí, åìàå ã÷ðé ìéä...

(d)

Answer#2: Alternatively, 'Ahanu Ma'asav' in connection with Shechitah means that he caused the owner a loss, and not that he acquires it ...

åìà äåé ë'àäðå îòùéå' ãîëéøä.

1.

Answer#2 (cont.): ... in which case it is not quite the same as 'Ahanu Ma'asav' in connection with selling (See Mesores ha'Shas).

68b----------------------------------------68b

3)

TOSFOS DH MAH T'VICHAH LE'ALTER AF MECHIRAH LE'ALTER

úåñ' ã"ä îä èáéçä ìàìúø àó îëéøä ìàìúø

(Summary: Tosfos queries the Hekesh, inasmuch as Mechirah cannot take effect immediately Mamash.)

åà"ú, åäà îîù 'ìàìúø' ÷åãí éãéòú áòìéí àé àôùø ìäéåú ãåîéà ãèáéçä, ãä"ì éàåù ùìà îãòú...

(a)

Question: 'le'Alter' cannot be taken literally, seeing as before the owner knows about it, it cannot take effect, as it does with Tevichah, since it would then be 'Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as' ...

å÷ééîà ìï ëàáéé ã'ìà äåé éàåù'?

1.

Question (cont.): ... and we Pasken like Abaye (in Bava Mtzi'a, Daf 22b), that it is not considered Yi'ush?

åé"ì, ãèáéçä ðîé àéï ãøê ìèáåç ìàìúø òã ùéáåà ìáéúå, åáúåê ëê îñúîà éåãòéï äáòìéí.

(b)

Answer: It is also not the way to Shecht immediately, until one arrives home, during which time one assumes that the owner got to know about it.

4)

TOSFOS DH GENEIVAH BE'NEFESH TOCHI'ACH

úåñ' ã"ä âðéáä áðôù úåëéç

(Summary: Tosfos queries the comparison between Geneivah and Geneivah be'Nefesh'.)

åà"ú, âðéáä áðôù ùàðé, ãìà àéú÷ù ìèáéçä?

(a)

Question: Geneivah be'Nefesh is different, in that it is not compared to Tevichah either?

åé"ì, ãäëà ðîé ìà àéú÷ù ìèáéçä, àìà áìà äé÷éùà éìéó ìä îèáéçä...

(b)

Answer: Geneivah S'tam is not compared to Tevichah either ...

åìäëé ÷àîø ø' éåçðï ãàãøáä, àéú ìï ìîéìó îëéøä îîëéøä.

1.

Answer (cont.): ... which explains why Rebbi Yochanan was able to ask that, to the contrary, one should rather learn Mechirah from Mechirah?

5)

TOSFOS DH REBBI YOCHANAN SAVAR CHIYUVEIH BEIN LIFNEI YI'USH BEIN LE'ACHAR YI'USH

úåñ' ã"ä øáé éåçðï ñáø çéåáéä áéï ìôðé éàåù áéï ìàçø éàåù

(Summary: Tosfos, assuming that the Halachah is like Rabah, points out that this clashes with Rebbi Yochanan, like whom we Pasken when he argues with Resh Lakish.)

úéîä, ãìëàåøä ÷é"ì ëøáä ã'éàåù ëãé ÷ðé,' å÷é"ì ëø' éåçðï ìâáé ø"ì ãçéåáéä àó ìàçø éàåù.

(a)

Question: We probably Pasken like Rabah, that 'Yi'ush ia Koneh', and we also Pasken like Rebbi Yochanan against Resh Lakish , that he is Chayav even after Yi'ush.

åàîàé çééá àçø éàåù, ëéåï ãéàåù ÷ðé, ùìå äåà èåáç åùìå äåà îåëø?

1.

Question (cont.): Now why should he be Chayav after Yi'ush, seeing as, since Yi'ush is Koneh, it is his own animal that he Shechts and that he sells?

åé"ì, ãàôùø ãìà ÷é"ì ìà ëøáä åìà ëø' éåçðï, ãëîä àîåøàé ðçì÷å áùðé àìå äãáøéí.

(b)

Answer: It is possible that we Pasken neither like Rabah nor like Yochanan, seeing as many Amora'im argue over these issues.

6)

TOSFOS DH HU DE'AMAR KI'TZENU'IN

úåñ' ã"ä äåà ãàîø ëöðåòéï

(Summary: Tosfos reconciles the Tzenu'im with a number of other Sugyos.)

åà"ú, åäà öðåòéí îçììéï àó àçø éàåù, ãäà ñúí âðéáä äåé éàåù áòìéí ëøáðï ãø"ù...

(a)

Question: The Tzenu'im transfer the Kedushah after Yi'ush, seeing as 'S'tam Geneivah is considered Yi'ush' like the Rabanan of Rebbi Shimon (later, Daf 114a) ...

à"ë, ÷ñáøé öðåòéï ãéàåù ìà ÷ðé, åø"ì îåãä ãàéï éëåì ìä÷ãéù àçø äéàåù, ãñáø éàåù ÷åðä?

1.

Question (cont.): ... in which case they hold that Yi'ush is not Koneh, whereas Resh Lakish concedes that one cannot declare Hekdesh after Yi'ush, since he holds that Yi'ush is Koneh?

åë"ú ãäåé éàåù ùìà îãòú, ùàéðí éåãòéí àí ì÷èå àí ìàå ...

(b)

Refuted Answer: And one cannot say that it is Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as, since the owner does not know whether they picked it or not ...

äà âáé 'úîøé ãæé÷à' àîøé' áàìå îöéàåú (á"î ã' ëá: åùí) ëéåï ãùëéçé ãðúøé, çùéá éàåù îãòú.

1.

Refutation: ... seeing as in the case of 'Tamri de'Zika' (Dates that the wind blew off the tree) the Gemara says in 'Eilu Metzi'os' (Bava Matzi', Daf 22b & 23a) that, since it is common for them to be blown of, it is considered Yi'ush mi'Da'as.

åé"ì, ãäëà ìà ùëéç ëåìé äàé ùéì÷èå, ùéøàéí îï äáòìéí åìà ãîé ìúîøé ãæé÷à, åçùéá éàåù ùìà îãòú.

(c)

Answer: Here it is not so common for people to pick the fruit, since they are afraid of the owner, and it can therefore not be compared to 'Tamri de'Zika', and is therefore considered Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as.

åàôé' ìî"ã 'éàåù ùìà îãòú äåé éàåù,' àéëà ìîéîø ãöðåòéï ñáøé ëø"ù ãàîø ã'ñúí âðéáä ìà äåé éàåù áòìéí'.

1.

Answer (cont.): In fact, even according to the opinion that holds that 'Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as is Yi'ush', it is possible that the Tzenu'in hold like Rebbi Shimon that 'S'tam Geneivah is not considered Yi'ush'.

åà"ú, åäéëé îãîé ä÷ãù ìçéìåì, ùëîå ùéëåì ìçìì îä ùáéã çáéøå ëï éëåì ìä÷ãéù, åäìà àò"ô ùàéï éëåì ìä÷ãéù ôéøåú ùì çáéøå, éëåì ìçìì ä÷ãù ùì çáéøå...

(d)

Question: How can one compare Hekdesh to Chilul, to say that just as one can be Mechalel what one's friend owns, so too, can one declare it Hekdesh, when we see that, even though Reuven cannot declare Shimon's fruit Hekdesh, he can be Mechalel his Hekdesh?

ëãîùîò áøéù äàùä øáä (éáîåú ã' ôç.) ã÷àîø 'àé ÷ãåùú ãîéí, îùåí ãáéãå ìôãåúå; åàé ÷ãåùú äâåó, àé ãéãéä ...' ...

1.

Source: ... as is evident at the beginning of 'ha'Ishah Rabah (Yevamos, Daf 88a), where the Gemara says 'If it is Kedushas Damim, it is because he is able to redeem it; whereas if it Kedushas ha'Guf if it belongs to him ... ' ...

îùîò ãá÷ãåùú ãîéí àéï çéìå÷ áéï ãéãéä ìçáøéä?

2.

Source (cont.): ... implying that with regard to Kedushas Damim, there is no difference between whether it belongs to him or to his friend?

åé"ì, ãìà ãîé, ãä÷ãù îàçø ùäå÷ãù éöà îøùåú áòìéí, åëîå ùäáòìéí éëåìéï ìôãåúå ëîå ëï àçø...

(e)

Answer: One cannot compare them, since once Hekdesh has been declared, it leaves the domain of the owner, in which case just as the owner can declare it Hekdesh, so too, can anybody else ...

àáì ëøí øáòé ,àò"â ãîîåï âáåä äåà ,äáòìéí æëàéí ìàåëìä áéøåùìéí.

1.

Answer (cont.): ... whereas with regard to Kerem R'vai, even though it is Mamon Gavohah, the owner has the sole right to eat it in Yerushalayim.

åà"ú, àëúé äøé éëåì ìçìì îòùø ùðé ùì çáéøå...

(f)

Question: Still, we see that one is able to transfer the Kedushah of the Ma'aser Sheini belonging to one's friend ...

ãàîøéðï áôø÷ äàéù î÷ãù (÷ãåùéï ãó ðä: åùí) 'àéï ìå÷çéï áäîä èîàä òáãéí å÷ø÷òåú îîòåú îòùø ùðé, åàí ì÷ç, éàëì ëðâãï áéøåùìéí'.

1.

Source: ... since the Gemara, in Perek ha'Ish Mekadesh (Kidushin, Daf 55b & 56a) states that one cannot purchase a Tamei animal, Avadim or Karka'os with Ma'aser Sheini money; and that, if one did, he should purchase the corresponding amount of fruit in Yerushalayim' ...

åôøéê, 'àîàé, éçæøå ãîéí ìî÷åîï?' åîùðé 'ëùáøç' ...

2.

Source (cont.): ... on which the Gemara asks 'Why can they not simply retract (so that the money is returned to the owner.)', to which it replies that it speaks where the seller fled (with the money)

àìîà îçììéï îòåú ùáéã äîåëø?

3.

Question (concl.): So we see that the purchaser is able to transfer the Kedushah from the money that is in the hand of the seller?

åé"ì, ãäúí äåé ëîå âæìï, ãàé ìà áøç, äåé äìå÷ç çåæø áå...

(g)

Answer #1: Because there he (the seller) is like a Gazlan, because, had he not fled, the purchaser would have retracted ...

åäåé ëîå 'âæì åìà ðúééàùå äáòìéí,' åëöðåòéï ãäëà.

1.

Answer #1 (cont.): ... and it is like 'Gazal ve'Lo Nisya'ashu ha'Ba'alim', similar to the Tzenu'in here.

àé ðîé, äúí ÷ðñà áòìîà.

(h)

Answer #2: Alternatively, there it is merely a K'nas ...

åëï îùîò äúí îúåê äñåâéà

1.

Support: ... as is implied there in the Sugya itself.

åîéäå áôø÷ ìåìá äâæåì (ñåëä ã' ìè. åùí) îùîò ùéëåì àãí ìçìì [ãîé] ôéøåú ùáéòéú ùì çáéøå ùìà îãòúå ...

(i)

Question: In Perek Lulav ha'Gazul however (Succah, Daf 39a & 39b) the Gamara implies that a person is able to be'Mechalel the value of the fruit of Shevi'is belonging to one's friend without his knowledge ...

ãúðéà, 'àéï îåñøéï ãîé ôéøåú ùáéòéú ìòí äàøõ éåúø îîæåï ùìù ñòåãåú, åàí îñø, àåîø "äøé îòåú äììå îçåììéï òì ôéøåú ùéù ìé áúåê áéúé," åáà åàåëìï áúåøú ùáéòéú?'

1.

Source: As the Beraisa states there 'One is not permitted to give the money of Sh'mitah fruit to an Am ha'Aretz to the value of more than three meals; and that if one did, he declares 'Behold that money is transferred on to the fruit that I have at home, which he subsequently eats with the Din of Shevi'is.

åé"ì, ãàô÷éðäå øáðï îøùåú òí äàøõ ëãé ùìà éäà ðëùì, åàå÷îéðäå áøùåú æä ùéåëì ìçìì...

(j)

Answer: The Rabanan took that money out of the domain of the Am ha'Aretz to prevent him from transgressing, and placed it in the domain of the seller to enable him to transfer it ...

ã'äô÷ø á"ã äô÷ø'.

1.

Source: ... based on the principle 'Hefker Beis-Din Hefker'.

åîéäå ÷ùä, ãáô"÷ ãáëåøåú (ãó éà. åùí ã"ä äôåãä) îùîò ã'äôåãä ôèø çîåø ùì çáéøå, ôãéåðå ôãåé, åàôéìå ùìà îãòúå' ...

(k)

Question: In the first Perek of Bechoros (Daf 11a See Tosfos, DH 'ha'Podeh') it implies that if someone redeems someone else's Petter Chamor, his redemption takes effect, even without the latter's knowledge' ...

îãáòé ìéä 'ôãéåðå ôãåé ìôåãä, àå ãìîà ôãéåðå ôãåé ìáòìéí'. åàé îãòú áòìéí, ãåîä äéä ãôãéåðå ôãåé ìáòìéí?

1.

Question (cont.): ... since the Gemara asks 'Whether it is redeemed for the benefit of the redeemer or for the benefit of the owner' - and if it was with his knowledge, it seems obvious that it would be redeemed for the benefit of the owner.

åéù ìåîø, ãôèø çîåø ìà ãîé ìëøí øáòé...

(l)

Answer: Petter Chamor is not comparable to Kerem R'vai ...

ãëéåï ãàñåø áäðàä, äåé ëîå ä÷ãù, ìòðéï æä ùéëåì ëì àãí ìôãåúå...

1.

Reason: Because, since it is Asur be'Hana'ah, it is like Hekdesh, in that anybody is permitted to redeem it ...

åìà îîù äåé ëä÷ãù, ãáä÷ãù ôùéèà ìï ãôãéåðå ôãåé ìôåãä åáôèø çîåø îñ÷éðï ãôãåé ìáòìéí.

2.

Reason (cont.): ... though not completely like Hekdesh, since it is obvious that Hekdesh is redeemed for the benefit of the redeemer, whereas the Gemara concludes that Petter Chamor is redeemed for the benefit of the owner.

åîéäå ãáø úéîä, ãäéëé îãîé ä÷ãù ëìì ìçéìåì...

(m)

Question: How can one compare Hekdesh to Chilul in the first place ...

ãìîä ìà éåëì ìçìì ðèò øáòé åîòùø ùðé ùì çáéøå ùìà îãòúå, ëéåï ãæëåú äåà ìå - ã'æëéï ìàãí ùìà áôðéå?'

1.

Question (cont.): ... why should one not be able to transfer one's friend's Neta R'vai and Ma'aser Sheini without his knowledge, seeing as it is merit for him - due to the principle 'Zachin le'Adam she'Lo be'Fanav' (Eruvin 81b)?

ãäà ãîáòé ìï áàéï áéï äîåãø (ðãøéí ã' ìå:) 'äúåøí îùìå òì ùì çáéøå, öøéê ãòú áòìéí àå ìàå... '

(n)

Refuted Answer: ... because even though the Gemara in 'Ein bein ha'Mudar' (Nedarim, Daf 36b) asks whether someone who separates T'rumah on behalf of his friend requires his friend's consent or not ...

äééðå èòîà ëã÷àîø äúí ã'ãìîà ðéçà ìéä ìîòáã îöåä áîîåðéä' ...

1.

Refutation: ... that is only because 'It may well be that the owner prefers to perform the Mitzvah himself', as the Gemara explains there.

àáì äëà, åëé àéï èåá ìäí ìîì÷èéí ùéçììå àåúí äáòìéí, îîä ùéàëìå áìà çéìåì [åò' úåñ' ÷ãåùéï ðå. ã"ä îú÷éó]?

(o)

Question (concl.): ... whereas here, would it not be better for the pickers for the owner to transfer the Kedushah, than that they eat it without transferring it? (See Tosfos, Kidushin Daf 56a DH 'Maskif').