KIDUSHIN 26 (5 Cheshvan) - Dedicated in honor of the fourth Yahrzeit of Reb Naftali ben Reb Menachem Mendel (Tuli Bodner) Z"L, an Ish Chesed and Ish Ma'aseh radiating joy, whose Ahavas Yisrael knew no bounds. Dedicated by his son, Mordechai Bodner of Givat Mordechai, Yerushalayim.

1)

(a)Karka is acquired by through Kesef, Shtar or Chazakah. What does Chazakah entail?

(b)Why does our Mishnah refer to Karka as 'Nechasim she'Yesh la'Hem Acharayos'?

(c)Which direct Kinyan does the Tana specify for Metaltelin ('Nechasim she'Ein la'Hem Acharayos')?

(d)In which regard ...

1. ... do Metaltelin require Karka?

2. ... does Karka require Metaltelin?

1)

(a)Karka is acquired by through Kesef, Shtar or Chazakah. Chazakah entails digging a little, walking round the borders of the field, locking it or making a breach in the fence (anything which demonstrates ownership of the land).

(b)Our Mishnah refers to Karka as 'Nechasim she'Yesh la'Hem Acharayos' because, due to their indestructible character, people tend to rely on them as collateral.

(c)The direct Kinyan which the Tana specifies for Metaltelin ('Nechasim she'Ein la'Hem Acharayos') is Meshichah (though Hagbahah and Mesirah [see Rav DH 'veshe'Ein la'Hem'] are effective too, as is Chalipin).

(d)

1. Metaltelin require Karka to acquire them (via Kinyan 'Metaltelin Agav Karka').

2. Karka require Metaltelin regarding a Shevu'ah (i.e. one does not swear on Karka, unless there is also a claim on Metaltelin which requires a Shevu'ah ['Gilgul Shevu'ah']).

2)

(a)Chizkiyah learns Kinyan Kesef by Karka from the Pasuk in Yirmeyahu "Sados ba'Kesef Yiknu". Seeing as the Pasuk continues "v'Chasov ba'Sefer v'Chasom", how do we know that Chazakah acquires even without a Shtar?

(b)Then what is the object of the Shtar?

(c)Rav qualifies the Din of Chazakah. Under which circumstances does Chazakah require a Shtar?

(d)Rav Idi bar Avin, it seems, lived in a place where it was customary to write a Shtar. What would he stipulate when purchasing land? What are the implications of his stipulation?

2)

(a)Chizkiyah learns Kesef from the Pasuk in Yirmeyahu "Sados ba'Kesef Yiknu". Despite the continuation of the Pasuk "v'Chasov ba'Sefer v'Chasom", we know that Kesef acquires without a Shtar because the word "Yiknu" appears immediately after "ba'Kesef" (rather than after "ba'Sefer").

(b)The object of the Shtar is merely as a proof of sale.

(c)Rav qualifies the Din of Chazakah, which does not acquire without a Shtar there where it is customary to write a Shtar (because the purchaser expects one before he will finalize the deal).

(d)Rav Idi bar Avin, it seems, lived in a place where it was customary to write a Shtar. When purchasing land, he would therefore stipulate that if he wanted his money to acquire (to prevent the seller from retracting in the interim), then it would; whereas if he wanted the Shtar to acquire (so that he would be able to retract until he received it), then it would.

3)

(a)Why can we not learn Kinyan Shtar by Karka from the Pasuk "v'Chasov ba'Sefer v'Chasom"?

(b)What do we then learn from the Pasuk in Yirmeyahu "va'Ekach Es Sefer ha'Miknah"?

(c)Shmuel qualifies this ruling? According to him, by which sort of transaction, does Shtar alone ...

1. ... acquire?

2. ... not acquire?

3)

(a)We cannot learn Kinyan Shtar by Karka from the Pasuk "v'Chasov ba'Sefer v'Chasom" because that Pasuk speaks about Kinyan Kesef, and the Shtar is merely a proof of sale (as we just explained).

(b)We learn from the Pasuk (Ibid.) "va'Ekach Es Sefer ha'Miknah"- that Karka can be acquired with a Shtar.

(c)According to Shmuel, Shtar alone ...

1. ... acquires by a gift.

2. ... does not acquire on its own by a sale, until the purchaser actually pays for his purchase, in keeping with the seller's expectations.

4)

(a)Rav Hamnuna queries Shmuel from a Beraisa, which writes 'Kasav Lo Al ha'Neyar ... 'Sadi Mechurah Lach, Sadi Nesunah Lach, Harei Zu Mechurah u'Nesunah'. How did Rav Hamnuna himself answer this question?

(b)Rav Ashi establishes the Beraisa even by an ordinary field. How does he then reconcile the Beraisa with Shmuel?

(c)Why did he then add the word 'Mechurah' in the Shtar?

(d)The Machlokes between Rav Hamnuna and Rav Ashi is based on the interpretation of one word (even one letter) in the Beraisa. Which one?

4)

(a)Rav Hamnuna queries Shmuel from a Beraisa, which writes 'Kasav Lo Al ha'Neyar ... 'Sadi Mechurah Lach, Sadi Nesunah Lach, Harei Zu Mechurah u'Nesunah'. To answer this question, Rav Hamnuna himself establishes the Beraisa by someone who is selling his field because of its poor quality, in which case he is only too happy to find a buyer, and does not mind waiting for the money.

(b)Rav Ashi establishes the Beraisa even by an ordinary field, and establishing it exclusively by someone who gave his field as a gift, and ...

(c)... the reason that he added 'Mechurah' was in order to enable the recipient to claim the value of the field (as recorded in the Shtar) should his creditors claim it from the purchaser.

(d)The Machlokes between Rav Hamnuna and Rav Ashi is based on the interpretation of one word in the Beraisa. Whether 'Mechurah u'Nesunah' means sold or given as a gift (Rav Hamnuna), or 'sold and given as a gift'.

5)

(a)What does Chizkiyah learn from the Pasuk in Yirmiyahu "u'Shevu b'Areichem Asher Tefastem Bah"?

(b)According to Tana d'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, the source is a Pasuk in Ekev. Which Pasuk?

(c)Our Mishnah might learn that Meshichah acquires Metaltelin, from the Pasuk in Behar "O Kanoh mi'Yad Amisecha" ('Davar ha'Nikneh mi'Yad l'Yad'). What does Rebbi Yochanan learn from there?

(d)In that case, what is the source for Meshichah, according to him?

5)

(a)Chizkiyah learns from the Pasuk in Yirmeyahu "u'Shevu b'Areichem Asher Tefastem Bah" ('Bameh Tefastem, bi'Yeshivah') Kinyan Chazakah by Karka.

(b)According to Tana d'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, the source for this is the Pasuk in Ekev "vi'Yerishtem Osah vi'Yeshavtem Bah" ('Bameh Yerashtem, bi'Yeshivah').

(c)The Tana of our Mishnah might learn that Meshichah acquires Metaltelin from the Pasuk in Behar "O Kanoh mi'Yad Amisecha" ('Davar ha'Nikneh mi'Yad l'Yad'). Rebbi Yochanan learns from there that Kesef acquires Metaltelin min ha'Torah.

(d)In that case, the source for Meshichah is mid'Rabanan (to replace Kesef), for fear that the seller will allow the bought article (which already belongs to the buyer min ha'Torah) to get burned, claiming that he was not responsible. By making Meshichah, the purchaser will be encouraged to take the article away, thereby avoiding such a situation.

6)

(a)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Divrei ha'Yamim "Vayiten la'Hem AvihemMatanos ... Im Arei Metzuros bi'Yehudah"?

(b)Rebbi Akiva says in a Beraisa that the small measure of land is Chayav Pe'ah and Bikurim. Why does he not include 'Viduy' (of Bi'ur Ma'asros) in the list?

(c)Besides Pruzbul, what else does he include in his list?

(d)Which She'eilah do we try to resolve from this last case?

6)

(a)We learn Kinyan Chazakah by Karka from the Pasuk in Divrei ha'Yamim "Vayiten la'Hem Avihem Matanos ... Im Arei Metzuros bi'Yehudah" that one acquire Metaltelin via the Kinyan that one makes on Karka.

(b)Rebbi Akiva says in a Beraisa that the minutest measure of land is Chayav Pe'ah and Bikurim. He does not include 'Viduy' (of Bi'ur Ma'asros) in the list because, unlike Bikurim, where the Torah writes "Hinei Heveisi Reishis Pri ha'Adamah Asher Nasata Li Hash-m), the Torah writes "u'Varech Es Amcha Es Yisrael v'Es ha'Adamah Asher Nasata Lanu, which even someone who does not own land can say.

(c)Besides Pruzbul, he also includes 've'Lik'nos Imah Nechasim she'Ein la'Hem Achrayus'.

(d)We try to resolve from here the She'eilah whether the Metaltelin that one acquires together with Karka needs to actually be piled up on the land that he is acquiring (Tziburin) or not. Because if it did, what sort of Metaltelin could one possibly pile up on a minute measure of land?

26b----------------------------------------26b

7)

(a)How does Rav Shmuel bar Bisna establish the case of 'Metaltelin Agav Karka' in the above Beraisa?

(b)On what grounds does Rav Yosef object to this explanation?

(c)How did Rav Ashi explain Rav Shmuel bar Bisna, making it more acceptable?

(d)What did the Chachamim advise that Madoni who visited Yerushalayim and who wanted to give a gift of a large consignment of Metaltelin, to do?

7)

(a)Rav Shmuel bar Bisna establishes the case of Metaltelin Agav Karka in the above Beraisa by someone who wants to acquire a needle.

(b)Rav Yosef objects to this explanation on the grounds that needles are not sufficiently valuable to warrant their insertion in the Beraisa exclusively for them.

(c)Rav Ashi therefore explained, that what Rav Shmuel bar Bisna meant was that he stuck the needle in the grounds to acquire it, but that there was a jewel hanging on it, and it is because of the jewel, which could be worth a thousand Zuz, that the Tana inserts this case.

(d)The Chachamim advised that Madoni who visited Yerushalayim and who wanted to give a gift of a large consignment of Metaltelin to purchase Karka and to be Makneh the Metaltelin together with the Karka.

8)

(a)So he went and bought a Beis Sela near Yerushalayim. What might a 'Beis Sela' mean?

(b)What Metaltelin did he give the beneficiary together with the Beis-Sela?

(c)How do we try and prove from there that Kinyan 'Agav' does not require the Metaltelin to be piled up on the land?

(d)How do we reinterpret 'Beis Sela', in order to refute this proof?

8)

(a)So he went and bought a Beis Sela near Yerushalayim. This might mean a minute plot of land the size of a Sela coin, or it might mean a sharp pinnacle of rock.

(b)Together with the Beis-Sela, he gave the beneficiary a hundred sheep and a hundred barrels of wine.

(c)We try and prove from there that Kinyan 'Agav' does not require the Metaltelin to be on the land because if it did, how could he have placed all those sheep and all those barrels of wine on such a small (or sharp) piece of land?

(d)To refute this proof, we reinterpret 'Beis Sela' to mean a large plot of land that was hard like a rock.

9)

(a)Rav Yehudah Amar Rav cited a similar incident, where the benefactor purchased a Beis Rova of land near Yerushalayim. What do we mean when we say that according to some opinions, the man was very ill like Rebbi Elazar?

(b)Like in the previous case, the man gave someone a hundred sheep and a hundred barrels of wine together with the plot of land. How much land did he give the beneficiary together with the Metaltelin?

(c)What did the Chachamim say about that?

(d)What do we try and prove from this incident? Why is this proof better than the previous one?

9)

(a)Rav Yehudah Amar Rav cited a similar incident, where the benefactor purchased a Beis Rova of land near Yerushalayim. What we mean when we say that according to some opinions, the man was very ill like Rebbi Elazar is that he was a Goses, and it is only according to Rebbi Elazar that a Goses requires a Kinyan (whereas according to the Rabanan, who hold 'Divrei Shechiv-Mera Ki'Chesuvin v'chi'Mesurin Dami', no Kinyan would have been required.

(b)Like in the previous case, the man gave a hundred sheep and a hundred barrels of wine together with the plot of land. The amount of land that he gave the beneficiary together with the Metaltelin was a Tefach square.

(c)The Chachamim condoned the man's actions.

(d)We try and prove from this incident too that Kinyan Agav Karka does not require the Metaltelin to be Tziburin, just like we tried to prove in the previous case, only in the previous case we were able to interpret 'a Beis Sela' to mean 'hard like a rock', whereas here there is no alternative to way of explaining 'a Tefach square'.

10)

(a)We reject this proof by establishing the gift, not as regular Metaltelin, but as money to the value of the Metaltelin, which one could pile up on a Tefach square piece of ground. How do we attempt to prove that this must be the case? How could the beneficiary otherwise have been Makneh the gift to the benefactor?

(b)On what grounds do we refute this proof? How could he anyway have been Makneh it, even if the gift comprised money?

10)

(a)We reject this proof by establishing the gift, not as regular Metaltelin, but as money to the value of the Metaltelin, which, we attempt to prove, must be the case, because otherwise why was the beneficiary not Makneh the gift to the benefactor with a Kinyan Chalipin (which can acquire other Metaltelin but not money, as we learn in Bava Metzia).

(b)We refute this proof on the grounds that, even if the gift comprised money, we will still need to understand why he was not Makneh it with Meshichah?

11)

(a)So how do we establish the case in a way that covers both money and other Metaltelin)?

(b)Then why was he not Makneh it to the beneficiary via a third party with Meshichah?

(c)In that case, why did the Chachamim tell the benefactor that he had no option other than Kinyan 'Agav', seeing as he could have used Meshichah via a third person?

11)

(a)We therefore establish the case when the beneficiary was not present, in which case Meshichah was not possible irrespective of whether the gift comprised money or regular Metaltelin.

(b)The reason that he was not Makneh it to the beneficiary via a third person using Meshichah is because he had not been long in the town, and at that point, there was no-one that he trusted with his money.

(c)When the Chachamim told the benefactor that the man had no option but Kinyan Agav (despite the fact that he could have used Meshichah via a third person), they were therefore referring to his personal prejudices.

12)

(a)What problem faced Raban Gamliel, who was traveling on a boat?

(b)It seems that he had already separated Terumah Gedolah, and he decided to give his Ma'aser Rishon to Rebbi Yehoshua. How do we know that Rebbi Yehoshua was a Levi? What function did he serve in the Beis-Hamikdash?

(c)To whom did he decide to give his Ma'aser Ani?

(d)Why was he taking Ma'aser Ani and not Ma'aser Sheni?

12)

(a)The problem that faced Raban Gamliel, who was traveling on a boat was that he had forgotten to separate Ma'asros before leaving on what was obviously a sudden and urgent trip.

(b)It seems that he had already separated Terumah Gedolah, and he decided to give his Ma'aser Rishon to Rebbi Yehoshua. We know that Rebbi Yehoshua was a Levi from the Sugya in Erchin which describes how, when he went to help Rebbi Yochanan ben Gudgoda to close the gates, the latter told him to desist, because singers and gatekeepers are forbidden to switch jobs. And the Sifri adds that a Levi who does so is Chayav Misah.

(c)He decided to give his Ma'aser Ani to Rebbi Akiva, who was a Gabai Tzedakah.

(d)He was taking Ma'aser Ani and not Ma'aser Sheni because it was the third or the sixth year of the cycle, when Ma'aser Ani replaces Ma'aser Sheni.

13)

(a)Bearing in mind that the produce was not in front of them, how was he Makneh these two Ma'asros to the two men?

(b)How did we try and resolve the She'eilah whether Kinyan Agav requires Tziburin or not from his words? What did he say that prompted us to do that?

(c)How do we refute this proof too? What ulterior motive might he have had in using the expression 'u'Mekomo Muskar Lo'?

13)

(a)Since the produce was not in front of them, he was Makneh these two Ma'asros to the two men by renting them the land on which the Ma'aser was lying.

(b)He made a point of saying 'u'Mekomo Muskar Lo' (stressing that it was the land which housed the produced that he was renting to them which we initially assume was because Metaltelin need to be piled on the Karka together with which they are being acquired.

(c)We refute this proof too, however, on the grounds that he might well have used the expression 'u'Mekomo Muskar Lo' in order to take the pressure off Rebbi Yehoshua and Rebbi Akiva to remove their produce from his storehouse at the earliest possible opportunity (rather than because the Metaltelin needed to be piled up on the land).

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF