brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
1. The Gemara explains Rebbi Aba's ruling in the case of Nascha d'Rebbi Aba (Daf 33, #5).
2. There is a dispute about whether Beis Din temporarily seizes disputed items when there is no clear owner.
3. The Gemara discusses what Beis Din should do (in #2) if they seized the item but no proof is found.
4. The Gemara rules according to Rebbi Yehudah in both cases (#2 and #3).
5. Two parties each claim a property belonged to their fathers, but they have no proof for their claims.
A BIT MORE
1. In this case, one witness claims that Reuven owes Shimon the bar of metal, and Reuven cannot make an oath because he admitted that he committed an act of thievery by swiping the bar from Reuven. The rule of "If one cannot swear, he must pay" applies, and therefore Reuven must give the bar back to Shimon.
2. Rav Huna: If one of the parties claiming ownership asks Beis Din to seize the item temporarily until he can bring proof of ownership, Beis Din should do so. Rav Yehudah: Beis Din should not get involved.
3. Rav Yehudah: They should not release the item. Rav Papa: They should release it, and the "strongest" disputant will take possession.
4. Beis Din should not seize the item, but if they did, they should not relinquish the item to the "strongest" party. Rather, they must keep it until they find out who is its rightful owner.
5. Rav Nachman: Whoever is "stronger" takes the land. Beis Din does not get involved in cases where there is no clear possession by any of the parties on the disputed land.
Next Daf Index to Revach for Maseches Bava Basra