Previous daf

1)

(a) Abaye also queries Rav Yosef from Rebbi Dosa ben Horkinas, who says that one is only Chayav Reishis ha'Gez if he owns at least five sheep, each of which produces 'Manah u'Peras'. A Manah is a 'Litra'.
How much is a 'P'ras'?

(b) The Chachamim say 'Chamesh Recheilos Gozezos Kol she'Hein'.
How does Rav interpret 'Kol she'Hein'?

(c) What condition do we add to that?

(d) How does Rav Yosef refute Abaye's proof from here that sometimes 'Kol she'Hu' is La'av Davka?

(a) What is the difference whether a person says ...

1. ... 'Metaltela'i li'Pelanya' or 'Kol Metaltela'i li'Pelanya'?
2. ... 'Kol Metaltela'i li'Pelanya' or 'Kol di'Metaltel li'Pelanya'?

(b) Why is the lower mill-stone not considered Mitaltela'i, on the one hand, whereas it is considered 'Midi di'Metaltel', on the other?

(a) We ask whether Avadim are considered Karka or Metaltelin concerning someone who says 'Metaltela'i li'Peloni'. What is the She'eilah, considering that Avadim are considered Karka in the realm of Shevu'ah and Kinyan?

(b) What is the Torah's source for considering Avadim, Karka?

(c) Rav Ivya tries to resolve the She'eilah from a Beraisa, which includes the houses and the water-pits ... in the sale of a town, but not the Metaltelin.
What would also be included if the seller were to say 'Hi ve'Chol Mah she'be'Tochah'?

(d) How does Rav Ashi counter Rav Ivya's proof (that Avadim must be Metaltelin) from the fact that they are precluded from the sale in the Reisha?

(a) How does Rav Ashi therefore finally explain the Beraisa? Why does it in fact make no difference whether the Tana assumes Avadim to be like Metaltelin or like Karka?

(b) Ravina tries to resolve the She'eilah from the Beraisa that we quoted on the previous Amud 'Shiyer Karka Kol she'Hu, Lo Yeitzei ben Chorin'.
How did Rav Dimi bar Yosef Amar Rebbi Elazar explain 'Karka' there?

(c) And what reason did Rav Nachman give Rava for the fact that Chazal considered Metaltelin a Shiyur with regard to an Eved, yet they did not consider Metaltelin a Shiyur with regard to a woman's Kesuvah?

(d) What does this seemingly prove?

(a) On what grounds does Rav Ashi refute Ravina's proof? Why would the Eved not go free, according to the Chachamim, even if Avadim were considered to be Karka?

(b) From where do we learn that a Get Shichrur requires K'rus Gita?

(c) According to Rabeinu Chananel, this simply means that any Get Shichrur that includes rights for the master, is invalid, since it does not effect a clean break with the Eved.
What else might it mean?

6)

(a) Rava Amar Rav Nachman lists five donors, 'Shechiv-Mera, Avdo, Ishto, Banav and Mavrachas'.
What does he say about them? What do they all have in common?

(b) We have discussed all of these earlier, with the exception of Mavrachas. What is 'Mavrachas'?

(c) What will happen if the woman retains some of the property?

(a) Does it make any difference, in all the above cases, whether the Shiyur consists of Karka or Metaltelin.

(b) Sometimes, says Ameimar, Metaltelin is considered a Shiyur even by Kesuvah too.
When is that?

(a) We now list all the things that are included in the word 'Nechasim'.
What do we learn from the Mishnah ...

1. ... in Pe'ah 'ha'Kosev Kol Nechasav le'Avdo, Yeitzei ben Chorin'?
2. ... in Kidushin 'Nechasim she'Yesh Lahen Acharayus Niknin be'Kesef, u'vi'Sh'tar u've'Chazakah'?
3. ... there 've'she'Ein Lahen Acharayus, Ein Niknin Ela bi'Meshichah'? What kind of 'Nechasim she'Ein Lahen Chazakah' is the Tana referring to?

(b) In that case, what is the Tana referring to when he continues 've'she'Ein Lahen Acharayus, Niknin im Nechasim she'Yesh Lahen Acharayus'?

(c) We know that the Tana means to incorporate money in this Halachah, as well as other forms of Metaltelin from the incident with Rav Papa and Rav Shmuel bar Acha.
How much money did the Bei Chuza'i owe him?

(d) Why is Karka called 'Nechasim she'Yesh Lahen Acharayus'?

(a) How did Rav Papa retrieve his debt?

(b) Why did he go out to meet Rav Shmuel bar Acha as far as Tavach?

(c) Others say that 'Ad Tavach' means that he went to meet him half way, to prevent him from acquiring the money for himself.
On what grounds do we refute this explanation?

(a) Rabah bar Yitzchak Amar Rav describes 'two Sh'taros'. If someone asked two people to make a Kinyan on his field on behalf of a friend and to write him a Sh'tar, it is obvious that once the Kinyan has been made, the seller may no longer retract from the sale.
Is he then permitted to withdraw his instructions to write the Sh'tar?

(b) And what will be the Din if he said '*al-M'nas* she'Tichtevu Lo es ha'Sh'tar'?

(c) Based on the Mishnah in Get Pashut, Rav Chiya bar Avin Amar Rav Huna adds a third case of 'Sh'tar' to the previous two.
What will be the Din if the seller wrote such a Sh'tar, following which the purchaser acquired the field with Kesef, Sh'tar or Chazakah?

(d) What do we say about the latter case that proves our point?

Next daf