ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Basra 12
BAVA BASRA 12 - dedicated by Rabbi Kornfeld's father in memory of his aunt,
Malka Gitel bas Reb Yakov Mordechai (Malvina Marmorstein), who took him into
her home and raised him like her own child after the Holocaust. Her Yahrzeit
is 20 Nisan.
(a) If a minor road leads from town a. through town b., and which the former
use to enter the latter, should the latter want to seal its entrance into
their town - Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan forbids them to do so,
because the people from town a. have a Chazakah (a right to travel) along
(b) We learn that this Halachah applies even if there is another way of
entering the town, from Rav Yehudah Amar Rav, who said that one has no right
to spoil a path which the public has established as theirs.
(a) Rav Anan Amar Shmuel forbids the residents of a Mavoy to seal the exit
from the Mavoy to the main street into which it leads - because sometimes,
when the main street is crowded, the crowds spill into the Mavoy.
(b) We suggest that Shmuel's Din is equivalent to that of Rebbi Zeira Amar
Rav Nachman - who considers the last four Amos in a Mavoy leading on to the
main street as part of the main street.
(c) We refute this suggestion however, on the grounds - that Rav Nachman is
speaking exclusively about the Din of Tum'ah (i.e. 'Safek Tum'ah bi'Reshus
ha'Rabim, Tahor; bi'Reshus ha'Yachid, Tamei').
(d) The ramifications of this rejection are - that Rav Nachman's ruling is
not confined to the four Amos in the Mavoy closest to the Reshus-ha'Rabim,
but applies anywhere in the Mavoy.
(a) The Tana Kama of our Mishnah requires each person to receive nine Kabin
in a field that is to be divided, Rebbi Yehudah, four and a half. In fact -
they do not argue. Each one is simply stating the Minhag in his town, based
perhaps, on the quality of the ground (see Tosfos and Rabeinu Gershom).
(b) 'Radu' is the Aramaic for 'NIA' (plowing). 'bei ...
1. ... Karma' means' - a field the size that takes one day to plow in the
(c) A 'bei-Zar'a is easier to plow than a bei-Karba' - because it has
already been plowed that year in the plowing season.
2. ... Zar'a' - a field the size that takes one day to plow in the planting
(d) Based on this fact, the problem with Rav Yosef's statement that in
Bavel, each partner has to receive 'bei-Radu Yoma' before one partner may
force the other to divide a jointly-owned field is - that (if) 'bei Radu
Yoma' (refers to a day) in the planting season, will entail less than two
full days work in the plowing season (so how will he hire workers to do his
plowing then)? Whereas (if it refers to) a day in the plowing season, then
it entails less than one day's work in the planting season, resulting in the
(a) We resolve the problem in one of two ways. When we say 'I Ba'is Eima ...
1. ... Yoma de'Karba, be'Asra de'Yoma de'Karba ve'Tani', we mean - that Rav
Yosef was referring to a day in the plowing season, and in the planting
season, they would plow a second time (see Tosfos and Rabeinu Gershom).
(b) The equivalent Shiur ...
2. ... Yoma de'Zar'a, be'Asra de'Zar'a ba'Haduri' - that he is referring to
a day in the planting season, which would actually take a full day, because,
on the return journey, they would plant as they plowed (Tosfos).
1. ... for a jointly-owned well - Rav Nachman gives as the size that can be
watered in one day.
(c) This is substantiated by Sumchus in a Beraisa, who stated that if Reuven
undertakes to sell Shimon a 'portion' in a vineyard, he is obligated to give
him three Kabin, on which Rebbi Yossi commented - 'Ein Eilu Ela Divrei
Nevi'us' (meaning that he arrived at the truth, even though there is no
reason for it).
2. ... for a vineyard - Shmuel's father gives as an area of three Kabin (a
quarter of the area of the Mishkan [100x50 Amos]).
(d) Rava bar Kisna gives the Shiur in Bavel as three groups of vines. each
group consisting of - twelve vines. The reason for this is because this is
what constitutes one day's plowing.
(a) We object to Rav Dimi from Chaifa's statement that since the destruction
of the Beis-Hamikdash, prophecy was withdrawn from the prophets and given to
the Chachamim - because the Chachamim were always Nevi'im too (though their
power of prophecy differs in different ways from that of the Nevi'im).
(b) What he really meant to say was - that although Nevi'us was withdrawn
from the Nevi'im, it was never withdrawn from the Chachamim.
(c) Ameimar extrapolates from the Pasuk "ve'Navi Levav Chochmah" - that a
Chacham is even greater than a Navi, because one usually compares the
smaller to the greater, and not vice-versa.
(a) Abaye tries to prove Rav Dimi from Chaifa's statement - from the fact
that it often happens that one Chacham reiterates what another Chacham said
(without having heard it from him). See Agados Maharsha.
(b) Rava rejects this proof on the grounds that the two Chachamim are
perhaps born under the same Mazel. *He* therefore presents the proof - from
the fact that sometimes, a Chacham says something that was said by Rebbi
Akiva, who, due to his superior knowledge, must have been born under a
different Mazel than the second Chacham.
(c) Rav Ashi rejects Rava's proof on the grounds that the Chacham might be a
bar Mazel at least in that one point. He therefore finally proves Rav Dimi's
point - by the fact that sometimes, a Chacham reiterates a Halachah le'Moshe
(d) And he rejects the Kashya that maybe the Chacham's statement was just a
shot in the dark - due to the fact that he accompanies a sound reason with
(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan, after the destruction of the
Beis-Hamikdash, when prophecy was withdrawn from the prophets - prophecy was
granted to the Shotim and Ketanim instead (see Agados Maharsha).
(b) Mar bar Rav Ashi was standing in the main street of Mechuza when he
overheard a Shoteh say that whoever signed his name 'Tivyumi' would become
the next Rosh Yeshivah in Masa Mechsaya. This was of particular
significance to him - because he signed his name 'Tivyumi' (see Agados
(c) So - off he went to Masa Mechsaya.
(d) Upon his arrival in Masa Mechsaya, the Chachamim sent a pair of
Chachamim - to consult with him about appointing Rav Acha as the next Rosh
(a) To secure the position of Rosh Yeshivah in favor of Rav Acha - Mar bar
Rav Ashi kept the two Rabbanan by him, until they sent two more ... and so
on, until he had ten Chachamim gathered in front of him. Then he proceeded
to Darshen with such mastery, that they appointed him Rosh Yeshivah on the
(b) He waited until he had ten Chachamim before proceeding with his
D'rashah - because a Rosh Yeshivah would not Darshen (by the Kalah) until
there were at least ten Chachamim present.
(c) Rav Acha's reaction to Mar bar Rav Ashi's appointment was - to exclaim
'Kol ha'Meri'in Lo, Lo bi'Meheirah Mativin Lo, ve'Chol ha'Mativin Lo, Lo
bi'Meheirah Meri'in Lo'! In other words, he acknowledged that he had lost
the position for good.
(a) We support Rebbi Yochanan's statement regarding children from the young
daughter of Rav Chisda. When, as a little girl, she was once sitting on the
lap of Rav Chisda her father, whilst his young Talmidim Rava and Rami bar
Chama stood in front of him - her father asked her which one of them she
wanted, and she replied that she wanted both of them (which she later did).
(b) It seems that Rava, who would later refer to her as his favorite wife,
was no less a prophet than she was - for he added '... and me last', which
is indeed what happened.
(a) Rav Avdimi learns from the Pasuk "Ish Nevuv Yilavev" - that a person who
is empty ("Nevuv" means 'hollow', as we learn from the Targum of "Nevuv
Luchos" [Terumah, in connection with the Mizbe'ach]), in other words,
someone who has an empty stomach has two hearts (meaning that he has
difficulty in arriving at a decision).
(b) And Rav Huna B'rei de'Rav Yehoshua learns from the Pasuk in Zecharyah
"ve'Sirosh Yenovev Besulos" - that even if one's heart (i.e. mind) is closed
like a virgin, it will open up if he becomes accustomed to drinking wine.
(c) He also rules - that one gives a Bechor his Cheilek Bechor and his
Cheilek Pashut next to each other (since they are really one double
(d) According to Abaye, the same applies to a Yavam, since the Torah refers
to him as a Bechor ("ve'Hayah ha'Bechor Asher Teiled"). Rava disagrees. He
extrapolates from the words "ve'Hayah ha'Bechor" - that only *he* is
considered a Bechor (to take two portions), but his inheritance is not
considered that of a Bechor (to take them in one place).
(a) Reuven purchased a field next to his father's. When, after his father's
death, he considered it his right to take the field of his father's that was
closest to the one that he purchased - Rabah wanted to uphold his claim on
the basis of the principle 'Kofin Oso al Midas S'dom' (meaning that we force
a litigant who has nothing to lose, to grant the request of the litigant who
stands to gain).
(b) Rav Yosef objected to Rabah's intended ruling, on the grounds - that the
brothers can counter that the particular field in question is precious to
them like the high-quality fields of bar Meryon.
(c) When the two fields that Reuven and his brother inherited, each
contained a canal and Reuven claimed the right to take the field closest to
the one that he had purchased, Rabah again wanted to uphold Reuven's claim,
and this time Rav Yosef countered - that some canals dry up quicker than
others (and his brother's claim that the particular canal in question might
outlast the other one, was valid).
(d) Consequently, Reuven's brother could insist - that either they take half
of each field together with half of the respective canal, or Reuven must
*pay* for the right to take the field and canal of his choice.
(a) In a case where the two brothers inherited two fields which were both
watered by the same canal, and where Reuven asked for the field that was
nearest to the one that he had purchased - Rav Yosef ruled 'K'gon Zeh, Kofin
al Midas S'dom'.
The final case in the Sugya concerns a field belonging to two brothers with
a river running along the east side and a canal along the north. The only
fair way to divide the property in a way that gives neither brother an
advantage over the other is - by dividing it diagonally into eight sections,
so that Reuven and his brother each receive one section on the east side and
one on the north, plus one section on each of the other two sides.
(b) Abaye protest against Rav Yosef's ruling - on the basis of the argument
that the brother preferred Reuven to take his two fields one on either side
of his field, so that the additional Arisin that Reuven would have to employ
would ensure that his field was well-guarded too.
(c) The Halachah ...
1. ... in this case is - like Rav Yosef (because Abaye's argument, which has
nothing to do with the quality of the field, is unacceptable).
2. ... in the previous cases, where Rav Yosef argues with Rabah, is - like
Rav Yosef, too.