Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rav Z'vid, if the owner instructed the witnesses not to inform the Machzik of his Mecha'ah, the Mecha'ah is ineffective (and the Chazakah is valid).
What does Rav Papa say?

(b) In a case where the witnesses deny having informed the Mazik, what does ...

1. ... Rav Z'vid say?
2. ... Rav Papa say?

(a) What does 'Lo Teipak Leih Shuta' mean?

(b) According to Rav Z'vid, if the owner said this to the witnesses, the Mecha'ah is ineffective.
What does Rav Papa say in this case?

(c) If the witnesses claim that they did not say a word to a soul, Rav Papa invalidates the Mecha'ah.
What does Rav Huna B'rei de'Rav Yehoshua say?

(d) What is the Halachah in all of the above cases? In which case is the Mecha'ah not valid?

(a) Rava Amar Rav Nachman 'Mecha'ah she'Lo be'Fanav Havya Mecha'ah'.
Why is that?

(b) What if the Machzik does not get to hear about the Mecha'ah, and claims that he lost his Sh'tar?

(c) Rava asked on Rav Nachman from Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah, who ascribed the three-year period of Chazakah to the fact that the owner needs three years to hear about the Chazakah and travel to warn the Machzik. What does Rava extrapolate from there?

(d) Why does Rava ask from the Rebbi Yehudah, when he could have substantiated Rav Nachman's opinion from the Tana Kama, who, as Rav learned on the previous Amud, holds 'Mecha'ah she'Lo be'Fanav Havya Mecha'ah'?

(a) Rava asks on Rav Nachman from Rebbi Yehudah.
In which point (based on his previous ruling 'Ein Machzikin be'Nechsei Bore'ach') does he *not* follow his opinion?

(b) How does Rav Nachman answer Rava's Kashya?

(c) What makes it a good idea for the owner to go himself, even if he could make a Mecha'ah she'Lo be'Fanav?

(d) How do we reconcile Rava's Kashya on Rav Nachman (implying that he holds 'Mecha'ah she'Lo be'Fanav Lo Havya Mecha'ah', with the fact that he himself declared ' ... Havya Mecha'ah'?

(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba told Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina that Rebbi Yochanan requires two witnesses before whom to make a Mecha'ah.
What did Rebbi Avahu tell him?

(b) We try to connect their Machlokes with a statement of Rabah bar Rav Huna.
What did he say about anything that is said in front of three people? What did he mean by 'anything'?

(c) What does this have to do with Mecha'ah? Is a Mecha'ah also a form of Lashon ha'Ra (since the owner informs the witnesses that the Machzik is a Gazlan)?

(a) So what is it that we learn from Rabah bar Rav Huna?

(b) In which point does Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan disagree with him?

7)

(a) Alternatively, both opinions agree with Rabah bar Rav Huna (that once three people are told something, it is considered as if everyone knows about it), and they argue over whether 'Mecha'ah she'Lo be'Fanav, Havya Mecha'ah (Rebbi Avahu) or not (Rebbi Chiya bar Aba).
Seeing as both opinions agree that publicity requires three, what will then be the reasoning behind each one's opinion? Why does ...

1. ... Rebbi Chiya bar Aba make do with two witnesses?
2. ... Rebbi Avahu require three?

(b) Yet a third alternative suggests that they both agree with Rav bar Rav Huna and both hold 'Mecha'ah she'Lo be'Fanav, Havya Mecha'ah'.
Then what is the basis of their Machlokes?

(a) Gidal bar Minyumi made a Mecha'ah in front of three Amora'im.
Does this prove that Mecha'ah requires three?

(b) What did they say to him when, the following year, he came to repeat the Mecha'ah?

(a) What does Resh Lakish quoting bar Kapara say about making a Mecha'ah more than once?

(b) What objection do we raise to Rebbi Yochanan's protest 've'Chi Gazlan Yesh Lo Chazakah'?

(c) So what did Resh Lakish mean to say?

(a) What does bar Kapara say about 'Ir'er Chazar ve'Ir'er Chazar ve'Ir'er'?

(b) Why is it appropriate that specifically he issues this ruling?

(c) What might the two different claims be?

(d) Why do we not accept ...

1. ... the owner's first claim?
2. ... his second claim?

Next daf