michelle

Bava Batra 72

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Apr 042017
 

Study Guide Bava Batra 72

How can we reconcile Rav Huna with Rabbi Shimon?  The gemara suggests one possibility but it is rejected based on an understanding of Rabbi Shimon’s opinion elsewhere in a braita regarding one who consecrates a field.  Based on also a contradiction within Rabbi Shimon’s statement in our mishna and Rabbi Shimon in the braita, the gemara concludes that RAbbi Shimon in our mishna is not actually his own opinion but what he thinks the rabbis should hold according to their opinion.  The gemara then questions Rabbi Shimon’s opinion in the braita with an opinion of Rabbi Shimon’s in another case.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 71

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Apr 032017
 

When someone sells – do they sell with a good eye or a bad eye?  What is included on the sale of a field according to each opinion of this argument?  How is a gift, children dividing an inheritance field, someone who consecrates his property to the Temple different from a sale?  How are each different from each other?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 70

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Apr 022017
 

If generally something is not included in a sale – like trees in the field, if one says I am selling you the field without one specific tree, does that mean that all the other trees are included or are none of the trees included?  By adding words, can it actually make it worse for the seller?  If one gives something to another to watch and has a document to prove it, can the shomer claim he/she returned it (even though the document is still in the hands of the other) because since he/she could claim accidental damage, he/she is believed by a migo that it was returned?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 68

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Mar 312017
 

One who sells a city – what is included?  Are slaves considered like land or movable property?  Can we derive an answer to that question from the mishna?  The mishna mentioned beit hashlachin – what is its definition?  Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel talked about a santar – what is its definition?  One who sells a field what other items are and are not included in the sale?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 66

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Mar 292017
 

Study Guide Bava Batra 66

The gemara brings a braita relating to the difference in halacha between a tube created and attached to the ground or attached to the ground first and then hollowed out while attached to the ground.  If the former case, it is considered a vessel and therefore water can’t be passed through there to fill up a mikveh as it is considered mayim sheuvim.  In the latter case, it is considered attached to the ground and is not a vessel adn therefore one can fill up a mikveh through there.  The gemara asks a question – this doesn’t seem to match Rabbi Eliezer or the rabbis opinions.  First the gemara needs to establish which argument between Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis is the question referring to and then it answers which opinion in that argument matches the braita.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 65

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Mar 282017
 

Rav and Shmuel choose sides in the Rabbi Akiva debate with the rabbis about whether one sells with a good eye or a bad eye.  And discussions are held regarding their respective decisions.  One who sells a house without specifying, what other items does it include?  Millstones, locks, keys, ovens, etc?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 64

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Mar 272017
 

Further attempts to support or weaken Rav Dimi are brought but are rejected.  When one sells a property, it doesn’t include a well or cistern (if it is not specified as learned previously).  But does one have an accessway to get there or does one need to buy an access route?  There is a debate between Rabbi Akiva and the rabbis about this.  Is their debate based on a well known debate between them: does a seller sell with a “good” eye (includes more in the sale) or a “bad” eye (includes less in the sale)?  Or is there a different debate going on here and that debate comes from a different mishna?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 63

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Mar 262017
 

When one says (or writes in a contract) that one is selling “part of the land” – is the intention half or not?  Different uses of the word “part” may mean different things.  Raba brings a few cases and explains the differences.  However, Abaye disagrees with him and thinks there is no distinction between the cases as each can be explained in the same manner.  A Levite can sell one property and stipulate that the owner give him the Levite tithes.  How can one do this if it is selling something that does not yet exist?  The assumption is he is retain rights to part fo the land.  Reish Lakish makes an assumption that one can learn from here to a different case and Rav Zevid and Rav Pappa debate what the relevance of Reish Lakish’s statement is.  Rav Dimi discusses the difference between a sale with no specification, one where it was stipulated that the buyer acquires the depths and the heights, and one where the buyer acquired from the depths of the earth to the height of the sky.  What items are included in each case?  The gemara tries to prove his statement from the next mishna, but then rejects the proof.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

 Older Entries  Newer Entries