Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE ARGUMENT IN THE MISHNAH

(a) (Mishnah): Chachamim say, to take money from the giver, one must bring proof.
(b) Question: What proof must the recipients bring?
(c) Answer #1 (Rav Huna): They must bring witnesses (that Reuven was healthy when he gave the gift).
(d) Answer #2 (Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna): They must validate the document.

1. Rav Huna says that they must bring witnesses - R. Meir and Chachamim argue as R. Yakov and R. Noson (153B):

i. R. Meir holds like R. Noson (we assume that Reuven was then as he is now, healthy);
ii. Chachamim hold like R. Yakov,

2. Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna say that they must validate the document - R. Meir and Chachamim argue whether or not the lender must validate a document if the borrower admits that he authorized it (but claims that he paid it):

i. R. Meir says, he need not validate it;
ii. Chachamim say, he must validate it (if not, the borrower is believed to say that he paid, Migo he could claim that it was forged).

3. Question: They argued about this elsewhere!

i. (Beraisa - R. Meir): (Shimon claims that he paid a loan but did not take back the document. The witnesses admit that they signed, but they say that they were invalid witnesses at the time), they are not believed to disqualify the document; (since Shimon admits that the document is valid, there is no need to validate it)
ii. Chachamim say, they can disqualify it (the lender must validate it - since the witnesses say that it was signed improperly, their testimony is not validation).

4. Answer: We need to hear the argument in both cases.

i. If they only argued there, one might have thought that Chachamim only say that witnesses can disqualify a document, not the borrower;
ii. If they only argued here, one might have thought that R. Meir would agree that witnesses can disqualify a document.

(e) Rava agrees with Rav Huna, they must bring witnesses.
(f) Question (Abaye): What is the reason?

1. Suggestion: Gift documents of healthy people usually say 'He was walking in the market...' and this one does not.
2. Rejection: Matanos Shechiv me'Ra usually say 'He was bedridden...', and this one does not!

(g) Answer: Since we are unsure, we leave the money where it is, unless they bring proof.
(h) R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argue as Rav Huna and Rav Chisda do.

1. (R. Yochanan): They must bring witnesses.
2. (Reish Lakish): They must validate the document.

(a) Question (R. Yochanan - Beraisa): A case occurred, Reuven sold his father's property (after he inherited it), then Reuven died; members of the family said that the sale was invalid because he was a minor at the time (even though he was *old enough* to sell land, he never had been shown to have grown two hairs. The buyers) asked if they may check the body (to prove that he was an adult).

1. R. Akiva: Firstly, you may not check the body, it is a disgrace; secondly, signs often change after death (R. Tam - perhaps he had white hairs (which are not a sign of adulthood) and now they look black; Ri - perhaps follicles developed after death, these are signs of adulthood).

2. Summation of question: We understand this if the buyers must bring witnesses - they could not find witnesses, so they wanted to check the body;
3. But if they must validate the document, why did they want to check the body?

(b) Answer (Reish Lakish): It is not as you understand, that the family was Muchzak in the property, the buyers wanted to check the body to get the property;

1. Rather, the buyers were Muchzak in the property, the family wanted to check the body (to prove he was a minor) to take back the property.
2. Support: When R. Akiva told them that they may not check the body, they were silent.

i. We understand why the family would agree to this (he is their relative, and they did not pay anything; Rosh - they agreed to go beyond the letter of the law and forfeit their claim);
ii. The buyers would not agree - they are entitled to try to get what they paid for, even if it disgraces him!

3. Rejection: R. Akiva told them, you may not check the body;

i. If you will say that because you paid money you may disgrace him, still, it does not help to check, signs often change after death (hairs can fall out).

(c) Question (Reish Lakish - bar Kapara): Shimon was Muchzak in a field, he was using it. Levi claimed 'It is mine', he showed a document that Shimon sold or gave it to him:

1. If Shimon denies having written the document, Levi must validate it to get the property;
2. If he says that it was a Pasim document (a fake sale, to make Shimon look rich) or Amanah (Levi trusted him with the document before receiving the money) or that Shimon did not pay yet (so Levi can retract): if there are witnesses, we follow what they say;

i. If there are no witnesses, we honor the document.

3. Is Bar Kapara like R. Meir (since Levi admits that he authorized the document, there is no need to validate it), and not like Chachamim?!

(d) Answer (R. Yochanan): No, all agree that if one admits that he authorized a document, the bearer need not validate it.
(e) Question (Reish Lakish): But they do argue about this!

1. (Beraisa - R. Meir): The witnesses are not believed to disqualify the document;
2. Chachamim says, they are believed.

(f) Answer (R. Yochanan): Chachamim believe witnesses to disqualify it, not the seller or borrower.
(g) Reish Lakish: But you were cited as saying that the family had a proper protest (even though they admitted that the deceased authorized the document, just they say that he was a minor)!
(h) R. Yochanan: R. Elazar said that in my name, I never said it.
(i) R. Zeira: R. Yochanan can deny what his Talmid said, but will he deny what he said to his Rebbi, R. Yanai?!

1. (R. Yanai citing Rebbi): If one authorized a document, the bearer need not (Ramban - needs to) validate it.
2. R. Yochanan: But we (Ramban - already) learned in our Mishnah, Chachamim say, to take money from another, one must bring proof, i.e. he must validate the document!

(j) R. Zeira: From Rav Yosef we can explain R. Yochanan.

1. (Rav Yosef): Chachamim say this (that the giver must prove that he was sick), but R. Meir says, to take money from another, one must bring proof.

(k) Question: Why did R. Yochanan say 'all agree that...he need not validate it' (only Chachamim say this!)?
(l) Answer: Because an individual (R. Meir) argues against Chachamim, the law is considered unanimous.
(m) Question: This is contrary to our Mishnah!
(n) Answer: We must switch the opinions in our Mishnah.
(o) Question (Beraisa - R. Meir): The witnesses are not believed to disqualify the document;

1. Chachamim says, they are believed.

(p) Answer: We must switch the opinions in the Beraisa.
(q) Question: But R. Yochanan said (154A) 'They must bring witnesses'!
(r) Answer: We must switch the opinions (R. Yochanan said, they must validate the document; Reish Lakish said, they must bring witnesses).