More Discussions for this daf
1. The Shevu'ah of Shenayim Ochzin 2. Picking up a Metzi'ah 3. Owning all of it
4. Sumchus or the Rabanan 5. Tosfos DH Yachloku 6. Questions in Rashi
7. Case of Mekach U'Memkar 8. Rashi According to Maskanas ha'Gemara 9. Shenayim Ochzin b'Talis
10. Insights to the Daf - Maharam Shif on Rashi 11. "It is all mine" 12. Claim of Ownership of Half of the Talis
13. Tosfos DH Yachloku 14. Arguing over a lost object that was found 15. Causing a Shevu'as Shav in our Mishnah
16. Teaching that Re'iyah is not Koneh 17. Two versions 18. Comparing 3/4 Talis oath with devolved oath
19. Acquiring through seeing 20. Terms of Chazakah and ownership 21. ááà îöéòà á. úã"ä áøàéä - äáèä áäô÷ø
 DAF DISCUSSIONS - BAVA METZIA 2
1. Moshe W asks:

Tosfos says in d"h Yachloiku that in order to say yachloku, it must be a Chelukah shyicholah liyhois emes, so how can tosfos say that by the case of ani aragtiah the din will be yachloku b'shvuah?

Moshe W,

Lakewood USA

2. The Kollel replies:

Shalom Moshe,

Great question! The Maharam on Amud Beis, on Tosfos DH d'Iy, writes that it is conceivable for both to say "Ani Aragtihah" and both be telling the truth, because one may have transferred half of the Talis to the other. This lines up with many Acharonim who understand Tosfos' "Yecholah Liheyos Emes" to mean it could be true regardless of the verbal claims, based on the fact that both are holding the Talis. Some Acharonim infer that Rashi and the Rosh disagree and require that the division fit the actual claims.

In any case, please look carefully at Tosfos DH v'Iy on 2b. I hope that will clear things up.

Kol Tuv,

Aharon Steiner