Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) DEPOSITS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN STOLEN

(a) (Beraisa): We do not accept deposits from a (married) woman, slave or child (perhaps he/she stole from his/her husband, owner or father);

1. If Reuven took a deposit from a woman or slave, he returns it to him or her; if he or she died, he returns it to the husband or owner;
2. If he took a deposit from a child, he sells it and buys a Segulah (something which yields fruits and the principal remains intact, as we will explain);

i. If the child dies, he gives the Segulah to the child's heirs.

3. If the woman, slave or child said just before dying 'It belongs to Ploni', we give it to Ploni;

i. If Reuven does not believe this, he gives it to the husband, owner or father.

(b) When the wife of Rabah bar bar Chanah died, she said 'These rings belong to Marsa and his grandsons.'
(c) Version #1 - Rav (to Rabah bar bar Chanah): If you believe her, do as she said; if not, keep them for yourself.
(d) Version #2 - Rav: If you think that Marsa and his grandsons are wealthy enough to deposit such rings by your wife (alternatively: if you think that your wife had friends who would give her such rings as a gift (on condition that you have no rights to them), do as she said; if not, keep them for yourself.
(e) (Beraisa): If he took a deposit from a child, he sells it and buys a Segulah.
(f) Question: What is a Segulah?
(g) Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): A Sefer Torah (for it may not be sold if not to get married).
(h) Answer #2 (Rabah bar Rav Huna): A date tree.

(a) (Mishnah): A father does not get a Chazakah in his son's property, nor vice-versa.
(b) (Rav Yosef): This applies even if the son is independent of his father (because one would not protest if the other used his property).
(c) (Rava): If the son is independent of his father, they can get a Chazakah against each other.
(d) (R. Yirmeyah mi'Difti): A case occurred; Rav Papi ruled like Rava.
(e) (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): I heard that Rav Nachman held like Rava.
(f) The Halachah follows Rava.
(g) Support (Beraisa): If a son was independent of his father, or a woman was divorced, he/she can get a Chazakah in the property of his/her father/ex-husband, like a stranger.

(a) Yakov died; Reuven (one of the orphans) used to buy and sell property of the estate on behalf of all the brothers. There were documents saying that he bought property or lent money; he claims that they belong to him himself, from money he inherited from his mother's father.
(b) (Rav): He must bring proof (if not, we assume that the property/loans belong to all the brothers);
(c) (Shmuel): His brothers must bring proof (if not, he is believed).

1. (Shmuel): Rav admits, after Reuven dies, his brothers must bring proof.
2. Question (Rav Papa): Do we claim on behalf of Reuven's orphans something which he himself could not claim (that they must bring proof)?!

i. Rava took combers' scissors and a Sefer of Agadata from orphans (of Ploni), for these are things that are normally lent or rented;

ii. (Rav Huna bar Avin): Things that are normally lent or rented (and they were known to previously belong to someone else), one is not believed to say that he bought them. (Since Ploni would not have been believed to say 'I bought them', we do not make this claim on behalf of his orphans.)

3. This is left difficult.

(d) (Rav Chisda): Rav's law is only when the brothers share everything, but if they prepare their food separately, we assume that Reuven acquired money by eating less.
(e) Question: What kind of proof must Reuven bring?
(f) Answer #1 (Rabah): He must bring witnesses.
(g) Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes): The document must be validated (this shows that Beis Din verified that it is Reuven's property).
(h) Rava (to Rav Nachman): As whom do you hold?
(i) Rav Nachman: I hold like the Beraisa.

1. (Beraisa): Reuven used to buy and sell on behalf of all the brothers. There were documents saying that he bought property or lent money; he claims that they belong to him himself, from money he inherited from his mother's father. He must bring proof.
2. Similarly: A widow used to buy and sell on behalf of the orphans. There were documents saying that she bought property or lent money; she claims that they belong to her, from money she inherited from her grandfather. She must bring proof.
3. Question: What Chidush do we hear regarding the widow?
4. Answer: One might have thought, since a widow that toils on behalf of orphans is respected, she is unlikely to falsely claim their money, she should be believed - the Beraisa teaches, this is not so (she feels she is entitled to compensation for her toil, and rationalizes claiming their property for herself).

(a) (Mishnah): This refers to Chazakah, but one who gives a gift, or brothers that divide an inheritance ...
(b) Question: Are the latter cases not Chazakah?!
(c) Answer: The Mishnah is abbreviated, it means as follows: three years are needed for Chazakah that is a proof of ownership (for one who lost his document), but regarding a gift, division of inheritance, or acquisition of Hefker property, when only an acquisition is needed (not a proof), locking the fence, fencing or breaching any amount in a wall is a Chazakah.
(d) (R. Hoshaya): Locking the fence, fencing or breaching any amount in a wall in front of the original owner is a Chazakah.
(e) Inference: If not in front of the owner, it is not a Chazakah?!
(f) Answer (Rava): He means, in front of the owner, the owner need not say 'Go make a Chazakah and acquire'; if not in front of the owner, the owner must say 'Go make a Chazakah and acquire'.