Answer (Beraisa): A divorcee may not get married (and live) in her ex-husband's neighborhood;

If he is a Kohen, she may not live in the same Mavoy (alleyway, even if she did not remarry).

A small village is considered like a neighborhood (Bach's text - Mavoy).

Question: Which of them must move away from the other?

Answer (Beraisa): She must move from him. He need not move from her unless it is her courtyard.

Question: What is the law if they jointly own the courtyard?

Answer (Beraisa): She must move from him.

This cannot discuss his courtyard, for this would be obvious!

It cannot discuss her courtyard, for then he must move!

Suggestion: We must say that they jointly own it!

Rejection: Perhaps he is renting it.

Question: What was the final ruling?

Answer: Rav expounded "Hash-m will move you like a man moves" to teach that moving is harder for a man than for a woman.

(Beraisa): If he (a Kohen) had borrowed things that she received from her father, she makes a Shali'ach to receive payment.

(Rav Sheshes): If they come to Beis Din together, we do not accept their case.

(Rav Papa): We excommunicate them.

(Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): We also lash them.

(Rav Nachman): This applies to divorce from Nisu'in. If he divorced her from Eirusin he may pay her directly, since they are not intimate with each other.

A couple divorced from Eirusin came in front of Rava.

Version #1: Rava set up a middleman, so they would not deal with each other.

Rav Ada bar Masna: Rav Nachman taught... !

Rava: I saw that they are intimate with each other.

Version #2: Rava did not set up a middleman.

Rav Ada bar Masna: Set up a middleman!

Rava: But Rav Nachman taught... !

Rav Ada: That is when they are not intimate with each other. Here, we see that they are intimate.

(Mishnah): A man may testify about the following things that he saw when he was a minor:

This is the signature of my father, Rebbi or brother;

When Plonis was married she went out with a Hinuma and uncovered hair (like the custom of virgins);

When Ploni left school he would immerse in a Mikvah to eat Terumah;

Ploni used to receive Terumah with us at the granaries;

This area is a Beis ha'Pras (a field in which a plow may have scattered bones from a Mes);

We used to walk this far on Shabbos (it is within the Techum in which one may walk);

One may not testify about seeing the following when he was a minor:

Ploni owned a path to his field here;

Ploni owned the place where they pause during funeral processions.

(Gemara - Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): He is believed only if an adult testifies with him. (Tosfos - this does not apply to Terumah.)

All three cases of signatures must be taught:

Had it taught only that he is believed about his father's signature, we would have thought that he is not believed about others, since he is not with them as much.

Had it taught only that he is believed about his Rebbi's signature, we would have thought that he is not believed about others, since he does not fear them as much.

Had it taught only about his Rebbi and father, we would have thought that he is believed about their signatures because he fears him or is often with him, but he is not believed about his brother.

Rather, since validation of documents is mid'Rabanan, Chachamim chose to believe him.

(Mishnah): He is believed to say that Plonis went out with a Hinuma and uncovered hair.

Since most girls are virgins when they marry, this is a mere Giluy Milsa (proper testimony is not required).

(Mishnah): When Ploni left school he would immerse to eat Terumah.

Question: Perhaps Ploni is a Kohen's slave!

Answer: This supports R. Yehoshua ben Levi, who forbids teaching Torah to a slave.

Question: Even so, this does not prove that he is not a slave!

(Beraisa): The following do not prove that a master freed his slave:

The master borrowed money from his slave;

He made the slave an overseer on his property;

The slave put on Tefilin in front of the master or read three verses in the Beis ha'Keneses.

Answer: There, the slave chose to do so. The master did not treat him like a son.

(Mishnah): ...He would immerse to eat Terumah.

This testimony permits Ploni to eat Terumah mid'Rabanan.

(Mishnah): Ploni used to receive a share of Terumah with us at the granaries.

Question: Perhaps Ploni is a Kohen's slave!

Answer: Our Tana holds that we do not give Terumah to a slave unless his master is there.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): (If a Kohen and his slave were mixed up at birth and we do not know who is the Kohen,) we do not give Terumah to a slave unless his master is there (i.e. they must come together to receive);

R. Yosi says, either can receive alone. He receives for himself (if he is the Kohen) or for his master (if he is the slave).

In R. Yehudah's area, receiving Terumah was a proof of proper lineage. In R. Yosi's area, it was not.

(Beraisa - R. Elazar b'Ribi Yosi): I testified only once, and through my testimony a slave was established to be a Kohen!

Objection: This cannot be! Hash-m does not allow a mishap to occur through a Tzadik's animal, all the more so through a Tzadik himself!

Correction: They sought to establish a slave to be a Kohen through his testimony.

He saw the slave receive Terumah in R. Yosi's area, and testified in R. Yehudah's area.

(Mishnah): This area is a Beis ha'Pras.

He is believed because Beis ha'Pras is only a stringency mid'Rabanan.

(Rav Yehudah): A person may crouch down and blow on the dirt of a Beis ha'Pras and (if no bones are seen) walk across.

(Rav Yehudah bar Ami): A Beis ha'Pras which has been walked on greatly is Tahor.

Any bone the size of a barley seed has surely been crushed (to less than this, so it is not Metamei).

(Mishnah): We used to walk this far on Shabbos.

The Tana holds that the Isur to leave the Techum is only mid'Rabanan.

(Mishnah): He is not believed to say that Ploni owned a path to his field here, or that Ploni owned the place where they pause during funeral processions.

This is because these cause a monetary loss to someone.

(Beraisa): One is believed (after he matures) about the following things he remembers from when he was a minor:

Father told me that this family is Tahor and this one is Tamei.

Objection: 'Tahor' and 'Tamei' do not apply to families!

Correction: Rather, this family has proper lineage and this one does not.

We ate at the Katzatzah (explained below) when Ploni's daughter married Ploni.

We used to bring Chalah and Matanos (foreleg, jaw and stomach from a slaughtered Chulin animal) to Ploni the Kohen.

He is believed only if he himself took them, but not if others took them.

In all these cases, a Nochri or slave who converted or was freed is not believed.

He is not believed to say that Ploni owned a path to his field here, or that Ploni owned the place where they pause during funeral processions;

R. Yochanan ben Berokah says, they are believed.

Question: In which case(s) does R. Yochanan argue?

It cannot be the last cases. These cause a monetary loss!

Answer: Rather, he argues in the Reisha;

The first Tana says that a Nochri or slave who converted or was freed is not believed, for he was not careful to observe precisely. R. Yochanan holds that since he planned to convert, he was precise.

Question: What is Katzatzah?

Answer (Beraisa): If a man married a woman of improper lineage, his family takes a barrel of produce and breaks it in the middle of the street;

They say 'Hear, our brothers Yisrael! Our brother Ploni married a woman of improper lineage. We fear lest our seed will be mixed with his. Come take some produce for a commemoration, so our seeds will not get mixed.

This is Katzatzah about which a child (after he matures) is believed.