HEKDESH OF A FIELD
(Mishnah): If one was Makdish his field at a period when Yovel applies, to redeem it, he gives 50 Shekalim for a field large enough to sow a Chomer of barley seed (a Beis Kor).
If there are ditches 10 Tefachim deep, or rocks 10 Tefachim tall, they are not measured with the rest of the field. If they are less than 10 Tefachim, they are measured with it.
Question: Granted, the slopes of the ditches are not Hekdesh (to be subject to the fixed redemption rates of fields, rather, according to their actual value), but the bottom of the ditches should be Hekdesh like fields!
Suggestion: Since the bottoms do not add up to a full Beis Kor, they are not Hekdesh as fields.
Rejection (Beraisa) Question: "A field (on which is sown) a Chomer of barley" is redeemed for 50. What is the source that a smaller field is redeemed proportionally at this rate?
Answer: "A field" refers to a field of any size.
Answer (Mar Ukva bar Chama): The case is, the ditches are full of water. They cannot be seeded.
Support: The Beraisa teaches them together with tall rocks, which cannot be seeded.
Question: If they are full of water, even if they are less than 10 Tefachim, they should not be considered part of the field!
Answer: Shallow ditches, even if they are full of water, are like basins of the field.
(Mishnah): If Reuven said 'I sell to you a Beis Kor or earth', if there are ditches 10 Tefachim deep, or rocks 10 Tefachim tall, they are not measured like part of the field. If they are less than 10 Tefachim, they are measured with it.
(Mar Ukva bar Chama): This is even if the ditches are not full of water.
Question: What is the reason?
Answer (Rav Papa): One does not want to pay money for a field he cannot farm at once.
Question: What is the law regarding Kidushin (if one was Mekadesh Al Menas that he has a Beis Kor, do dry ditches count towards the Beis Kor)?
Do we compare it to Hekdesh, or to a sale?
Answer: Presumably, it is like Hekdesh. He can tell her 'I will need to work harder to farm it (it does not matter to you).'
(Mishnah - R. Meir): Any Tenai that is not (Kaful, i.e. discusses both possibilities) like the Tenai made with the tribes of Gad and Reuven is invalid. "If they will cross the Yarden... if they will not cross to fight..."
R. Chanina ben Gamliel says, the verse does not teach this (it is not extra). There was a need to stipulate that if they do not cross, they will inherit (like other tribes) in Eretz Yisrael.
(Gemara) Question: R. Chanina ben Gamliel refuted R. Meir!
Answer: R. Meir can counter, it would have sufficed to write 'if they do not cross, they will inherit amidst you';
"In Eretz Kena'an" is extra, to teach that Tanayim must be Kaful.
R. Chanina holds that had it not written "in Eretz Kena'an", one might have thought that they will inherit among Bnei Yisrael in Gil'ad (Ever ha'Yarden), but not in Eretz Kena'an.
R. Meir holds that "amidst you" connotes everywhere that you inherit.
(Beraisa - R. Chanina ben Gamliel): A parable for this is a man who divided his property to his sons. He said 'Reuven will receive field A, Shimon receives field B, and Levi will give 200 Zuz and receive field C. If he will not give, he will inherit with his brothers in the other fields.'
He inherits in the other fields (if he does not pay) only due to the Kefel ('if he will not give...')!
Question: The parable is unlike our Mishnah!
In the Mishnah, without the Kefel, they would (be fined and) not receive in either place. In the parable, even without the Kefel, Levi would receive a share of everything except the first two fields!
Answer: In the Mishnah, R. Chanina thought that R. Meir considers the entire phrase to be extra, and disagreed (for without it, Bnei Gad would not get anything). After he heard that R. Meir meant that the Torah could have said only "v'Ne'echezu Besochechem", he gave a parable (in the Beraisa) to show why also "b'Eretz Kena'an" was needed (for the 'other property', Eretz Yisrael proper).
MUST BOTH SIDES BE EXPRESSED?
Question: (R. Meir holds that we may not infer the negative from the positive.) According to R. Meir, we understand why Hash-m told Kayin "if you will improve, you will rise. If you will not improve, sin crouches at the opening";
According to R. Chanina, why is the Kefel needed?
Answer: One might have thought that if you will improve, you will be rewarded. If you will not improve, there will be neither reward nor punishment. The Kefel teaches that this is not so.
Question: According to R. Meir, we understand "then you (Eliezer) will be exempt from my oath (if they do not consent to send the girl for Yitzchak)";
According to R. Chanina, why was the Kefel needed? (Just like we may infer the negative from the positive, we may infer that in this case he is exempt from the oath!)
Answer: One might have thought that if she wants to come, but her family objects, he should bring her against their will. The Kefel teaches that this is not so.
Question: Why was it needed to say "if she will not want to come"?
Answer: One might have thought that if her family wants to give her, but she objects, he should bring her against her will. 'If she will not want to come' teaches that this is not so.
Question: According to R. Meir, we understand "if you will go in My statutes... ", "and if you will despise My statutes...";
According to R. Chanina, why did the Torah need to write the Kefel?
Answer: One might have thought that if you will go in My statutes, you will receive a Berachah, and if you will despise My statutes, there will be neither a Berachah nor a curse. The Kefel teaches that this is not so.
Question: According to R. Meir, we understand "if you will desire, and listen... ", "and if you will refuse, and rebel...";
According to R. Chanina, why did the verse need to write the Kefel?
Answer: One might have thought that if you will desire, it will be good, and if you refuse, neither good nor bad will result. The Kefel teaches that this is not so.
Question: What does it mean "you will eat sword"?
Answer: This refers to hard salt, hard barley bread, and onions;
Unseasoned bread with salt and onions harm the body as swords.