Previous daf

1)

(a) Our Mishnah discusses a case where a house fell on Reuven and his father Ya'akov, or on Reuven and on his Morishin.
Who is meant by his 'Morishin'?

(b) What is now the bone of contention between Reuven's heirs and his father's wife or creditor?

(c) What do Beis Hillel mean when they say 'Nechasim be'Chezkasan'?

(d) On what basis do Beis Shamai then argue and say 'Yachloku'?

(a) What distinction does the Mishnah in 'Get Pashut' draw between a Milveh bi'Sh'tar and a Milveh al Peh?

(b) What is the reason for this distinction?

(c) Why, in the case of a Milveh bi'Sh'tar, may the creditor claim from the Lekuchos, even if Acharayus was not inserted in the Sh'tar?

(d) May the creditor claim from Meshubadim, if there are B'nei Chorin available?

(a) Shmuel asks whether 'de'Ikni ve'Kanah' is included in the Shibud.
What does he mean by that?

(b) Why is Shmuel's She'eilah not relevant, according to Rebbi Meir?

(c) Then what is his She'eilah, according to the Rabbanan?

(d) Why should a Shibud be better than a Kinyan in this regard?

(a) The Mishnah in Kesuvos discusses a case where Reuven produces a Sh'tar-Chov against Shimon, and Shimon counters this by producing a Sh'tar that Reuven sold him a field.
What point is Shimon making? Why does he expect to be exempt from paying?

(b) Admon accepts Shimon's argument.
What do the Chachamim counter?

(c) Rav Yosef tries to prove from the Chachamim that 'de'Ikni' is Meshubad (seeing as Shimon purchased the field after the loan took place).
How does Rava refute this proof? What is the significance of 'the shirt on his back', quoted by Rava?

(d) What does the She'eilah incorporate, besides claiming a (later) field from the *Lekuchos*?

(a) How does Rav Chana try to resolve our She'eilah from the case of 'Naflah ha'Bayis Alav ve'al Aviv' in our Mishnah, where the father died first?

(b) Rav Nachman refutes the proof, quoting Ze'ira Chavrin.
What distinction did Ze'ira Chavrin make between Lekuchos and Yorshin?

(c) Rav Ashi refutes this however, by quoting a statement of Rav and Shmuel.
What did Rav and Shmuel say about a Milveh al Peh?

(d) Why do we consider this case a Milveh al Peh? Who says there was no Sh'tar?

(a) Perhaps we do not hold like Rav and Shmuel?

(b) So how do we reconcile Shmuel's She'eilah with our Mishnah?

7)

(a) We have learned in the Mishnah in Shevi'is 'Sh'tarei-Chov ha'Mukdamin, Pesulin, ve'ha'Me'ucharin Kesheirin'.
What is ...

1. ... a Sh'tar-Chov Mukdam'?
2. ... a Sh'tar-Chov Me'uchar'?

(b) Why is the former Pasul?

(c) What does Rav Ya'akov from Nehar Pakud in the name of Ravina try to prove from the fact that a Sh'tar-Chov Me'uchar is Kasher?

(d) How do we refute Ravina's proof? Who is the author of the Mishnah in Shevi'is?

(a) What will be the Din according to Rebbi Meir, if they did not insert ...

1. ... Achrayus in the Sh'tar at all?
2. ... 'de'Ikni' in a Sh'tar-Chov Me'uchar?

(b) Then why did we not ask from this case on Shmuel?

(a) The Mishnah in Gitin discusses Sh'vach Karka'os.
What is Sh'vach Karka'os?

(b) What does the Beraisa say about Sh'vach Karka'os? From whom may the purchaser claim a. the Keren, and b., the Sh'vach?

(c) What does Rav Mesharshaya in the name of Rava try to prove from here?

(d) How do we refute this proof, too?

(a) On the assumption that 'de'Ikni ... Mishtabed', what She'eilah do we ask regarding a case where the borrower borrowed twice and then acquired property?

(b) According to Rav Nachman, this She'eilah was asked of the B'nei Eretz Yisrael, who replied that the first creditor has the right to the newly-acquired property. Rav Huna says 'Yachloku'.
What does Rabah bar Avuhah say?

(c) What do they mean by 'Yachloku'?

(a) Ravina quotes the Mahadura Kama of Rav Ashi and the Mahadura Basra.
What is the significance of

1. ... Mahadura Kama and Mahadura Basra, with regard to Rav Ashi?
2. ... the Chodshei ha'Kalah? What were the 'Chodshei ha'Kalah'?

(b) What did Rav Ashi rule in ...

1. ... the Mahadura Kama?
2. ... the Mahadura Basra?

(c) What is the Halachah?

(a) Quoting once more from the Beraisa 'li'Shevach Karka'os Keitzad ... ', how do we query the previous ruling from the conclusion of the Beraisa 've'es ha'Shevach mi'Nechasim B'nei-Chorin'?

(b) How do we refute this Kashya?

(c) What does Shmuel mean when he rules in Bava Metzi'a 'Ba'al-Chov Govah es ha'Shevach'?

(d) How come that in Bava Metzi'a, he rules 'Govin es ha'Shevach', whereas here he remains with the She'eilah?

Next daf