Previous daf

1)

(a) The Tana Kama of a Beraisa forbids soaking flax and washing clothes in wine of Shevi'is.
What is his source for this?

(b) And what does Rebbi Yossi learn from "Lachem"?

(c) What does the Tana Kama learn from "Lachem"?

(d) When washing clothes, the benefit from the fuel comes only when the garments are clean.
How long will it take to benefit from the wine in which the flax is soaking?

(a) Seeing as the benefit of the soaking and the washing come only after the wine has been destroyed, on what grounds does the Tana Kama forbid it?

(b) In that case, why does Rebbi Yossi permit it?

(c) Then what does he learn from "le'Ochlah"?

(d) On what basis does he include soaking and washing from "Lachem" and preclude healing (seeing as they both benefit the user only after they have been destroyed)?

(a) The Beraisa learns "le'Ochlah", 've'Lo li'Melugma ... ve'Lo le'Ziluf ... ve'Lo La'asos Mimenah Apiktozan'.
What is ...

1. ... 'Ziluf'?
2. ... 'Apiktozan'?

(b) Who is the author of this Beraisa?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah rules that in the case where the dyer changed the instructions and dyed the wool the wrong color, he must return the wool to the owner, who pays the least of the Sh'vach and the expenses.
What did Rav Huna say in this regard, that caused Rav Yosef to turn his back to him?

(b) Why did Rav Yosef react in this manner?

(c) Behind whom was Rav Yosef sitting when this incident took place?

(a) At the same sitting, Rav Huna also ruled like Yehoshua ben Korchah. The Rabbanan in a Beraisa, forbid lending Nochrim money prior to their festivals or claiming one's debts from them.
Why is that?

(b) What does Rebbi Yehoshua ben Korchah say?

(c) Why did Rav Yosef accept this ruling of Rav Huna more the previous one?

(a) As we just explained, Rav Yosef considered Rav Huna's ruling redundant because it is Machlokes ve'Achar-Kach S'tam. The S'tam Mishnah in Bava Metzi'a states 'Kol ha'Meshaneh, Yado al ha'Elyonah'.
What twin ruling does the Tana add?

(b) How does Rav Huna counter Rav Yosef's argument?

(c) In fact, Rav Yosef would not have questioned Rav Huna, had the S'tama occurred in most other Masechtos. He queried it simply because it happened to occur in Bava Metzi'a.
Why is that?

(d) What does Rav Huna say to that?

8)

(a) In a case where a Sheli'ach puchases barley with the money that was he received to purchase wheat in an investment partnership, one Beraisa rules that he bears the full liability for any losses, and enjoys the full benefits from any gains.
What does the second Beraisa say?

(b) Rebbi Yochanan establishes the two Beraisos as a Machlokes Tana'im. What is the basis of their Machlokes? Who are the respective authors?

(c) According to Rebbi Yehudah, seeing as the Sheli'ach is not Koneh, why must he bear the full brunt of the loss?

(d) Rebbi Elazar queries this explanation however.
Why might Rebbi Meir agree in the second Beraisa, that the Sheli'ach does not acquire the goods?

(a) So how does Rebbi Elazar reconcile the two Beraisos?

(b) Why did they laugh at Rebbi Yochanan's interpretation of the second Beraisa (where the owner takes half the improvement)?

(c) Why is this not a problem with Rebbi Elazar's explanation?

(d) And why would it not have been a problem had the Sheli'ach purchased wheat, as he was asked to do?

(a) What does the Mishnah in Erchin say about someone who declared his property Hekdesh or who undertook to pay someone's Erech with regard to his wife's and children's' clothes and the new clothes that he dyed for them?
Does the treasurer of Hekdesh have the right to claim them?

(b) Which additional example does the Tana include in this list?

(c) What does Rebbi Avahu attempt to prove from here?

(d) How does Rebbi Aba reject Rebbi Avahu's proof? Why else might the clothes that the Makdish dyed on behalf of his wife not belong to Hekdesh?

(a) If, as Rebbi Aba just explained, it is a matter of the owner's intentions, how do we account for the Mishnah in Erchin which authorizes the treasurer to take the Ma'arich's Tefilin? Why would a person intend to be Ma'arich his Tefilin any more than his wife's clothes?

(b) How does Rav Oshaya reject Rebbi Aba's explanation from the Mishnah there 'Chayvei Erchin Memashkenin Osan'?

(c) So how does Rebbi Aba amend his original counterproof? Why else might the clothes that the Makdish dyed on behalf of his wife not belong to Hekdesh?

(a) How does Rav Sheishes explain the Beraisa ...

1. ... 'ha'Lokei'ach Sadeh be'Shem Chaveiro, Ein Kofin Oso Li'mekor'?
2. ... 've'Im Amar Lo al-M'nas, Kofin'?

(b) Why would the buyer find it necessary to do this?

(c) How do we reconcile this with the B'nei Ma'arva, who hold of the S'vara (that we cited earlier) 'Mi Hodi'o le'Ba'al Chitin'? Here too, how would the seller know that he was purchasing the field on behalf of the Resh Galusa?

(d) How do we reject Rav Sheishes' explanation, from the Seifa of the Beraisa 've'Im Amar Lo al-M'nas, Kofin'?

(a) Abaye finally establishes the Reisha of the Beraisa to mean 'ha'Lokei'ach Sadeh be'Shem Chaveiro Resh Galusa.
What exactly is the case? What is the Tana saying?

(b) Why would he want a new Sh'tar anyway?

(c) Why is the seller not obligated to write a new Sh'tar on behalf of the purchaser?

(d) And how does he establish the Seifa 've'Im Amar Lo al-M'nas, Kofin'?

Next daf