Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rav Sheishes, who holds that a Shomer who denies that he is a Shomer, we might establish Ilfa, who says 'Shevu'ah Koneh', when the animal is standing in the meadow, as we just explained.
What are then the ramifications of 'Shevu'ah Koneh'?

(b) Alternatively, we might establish it like Rav Huna Amar Rav.
What does Rav Huna Amar Rav say about a Shomer who denies that he has the money that the owner is claiming from him and swears accordingly, should witnesses subsequently substantiate the owner's claim?

(c) From where does he learn this?

(d) What are the ramifications of 'Shevu'ah Koneh' according to this explanation?

(a) On what grounds does Rava restrict Rav Huna Amar Rav's ruling to a loan, but not to a Pikadon?

(b) So how does he know that this is not what Rav Huna Amar Rav really said?

(c) And does Rav's Din extend even to a case where the trustee later admits that he swore falsely?

(a) Rav Acha bar Minyumi asked Rav Nachman on this from a Beraisa.
The Tana there cites a case where after the trustee swore that the deposit got lost, witnesses testified to the contrary, and rules that he is liable to pay Keren.
Why does he not pay Kefel?

(b) And what does the Tana rule in the case where the trustee admits that he swore falsely?

(c) How does Rav Nachman initially reconcile the Reisha of the Beraisa (which obligates the trustee to pay Keren even after he swore falsely) with Rav Huna Amar Rav?

(d) What is then the problem with the Seifa, which speaks about the equivalent case as in the Reisha, but where the trustee claimed that the money was stolen (as opposed to lost), and which obligates him to pay Kefel?

(a) To answer this Kashya, why does Rav Nachman prefers not to establish the Reisha when he swore outside Beis-Din (like he just explained) and the Seifa, when he swore inside?

(b) He therefore establishes both cases inside Beis-Din.
Then back comes the Kashya on Rav.
Why, in the Reisha, is he Chayav to pay at all? Why does he not acquire the money with his Shevu'ah?

(c) Rami bar Chama asked Rav Nachman, who disagrees with Rav Huna Amar Rav, why he bothered to explain the Mishnah according to him.
What was his reply?

(d) If Rav Nachman disagrees with Rav, how does he then explain the Pasuk "ve'Lakach Be'alav ve'Lo Yeshalem"?

(a) Rav Hamnuna asks on Rav from the Beraisa, 'Hishbi'a Alav Chamishah Pe'amim, Bein bi'Fnei Beis-Din Bein she'Lo bi'Fsnei Beis-Din ve'Kafar Alav, Chayav al Kol Achas ve'Achas'.
What is he Chayav (assuming he confessed to each one)?

(b) Why, according to Rebbi Shimon there, is he Chayav?

(c) The Beraisa is clearly speaking in Beis-Din (because 'Hishbi'a Alav' [as opposed to 'Hishbi'o'] implies the Beis-Din and not the owner), so we cannot establish it outside Beis-Din, as we did the earlier Beraisa.
How does Rav Hamnuna himself therefore interpret ...

1. ... 'Bein Bifnei Beis-Din'?
2. ... 'Bein she'Lo Bifnei Beis-Din'?

(a) What does another Beraisa say about a To'en Ta'anas Ganav who swore and admitted ...

1. ... before witnesses testified against him?
2. ... after witnesses testified against him?

(b) Why can this Beraisa not be speaking either when he jumped and swore in Beis-Din, or when he swore outside Beis-Din?

(c) So how does Rava finally reconcile these Beraisos with Rav?

(a) Where the trustee admitted that he had sworn falsely, we just concluded, even Rav concedes that he is Chayav to pay, should witnesses testify against him, irrespective of whether it is a case of To'en Ta'anas Ganav or To'en Ta'anas Avad. The reason that Rav concedes by To'en Ta'anas Avad is because the Torah writes "ve'Hisvadu".
What is the reason by To'en Ta'anas Ganav?

(b) So which is the sole case where Rav holds that he acquires the deposit and is Patur?

(c) When Rav Gamda told this explanation to Rav Ashi, he objected.
Based on Rav Hamnuna's earlier Kashya, what was the basis of his objection?

(d) To whom does Amri Bei Rav refer?

(a) Rav Acha Saba therefore reinterprets Rav Hamnuna's Kashya. In fact, it is not the fact that he could admit that makes it Mamon (as we initially interpreted Rebbi Shimon).
Then what is he asking? What is it that makes it Mamon?

(b) And why is he not Patur because of the principle 'Ein Shevu'ah Chalah al Shevu'ah'?

(c) Why, in fact, can the criterion of whether or not, it is called Mamon, not be determined by whether he admits to having sworn falsely?

9)

(a) We know that a To'en Ta'anas Ganav by Pikadon pays Kefel. What does Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan say about a To'en Ta'anas Ganav by Pikadon who then sells or Shechts the sheep or the cow that he is guarding?

(b) from where does he learn this?

(c) Assumisng this to be a 'Mah Matzinu', what Pircha can we ask on this Limud?

(d) How do we answer this Kashya? If Rebbi Yochanan does not learn this comparison from a 'Mah Matzinu', then from where does he learn it?

(a) Having learned To'en Ta'anas Ganav from Ganav with a Hekesh, why do we find it necessary to then learn it from the extra 'Hey' in "Ganav ha'Ganav" of To'en Ta'anas Ganav?

(b) What do we extrapolate from the Beraisa which obligates a To'en Ta'anas Ganav to pay Kefel if witnesses testified that he ate the sheep that he claimed it was stolen?

(c) What Kashya does Rebbi Chiya bar Aba ask on Rebbi Yochanan from this Beraisa?

(d) What does Rebbi Yochanan answer? How did he establish the Beraisa?

(a) Why does Rebbi Yochanan decline to answer that he ate it ...

1. ... when it was a T'reifah?
2. ... when it was a ben Peku'ah?

(b) What is a ben Peku'ah?

(c) What distinction does Rava make between a Ganav who Shechted or sold an animal after Beis-Din ruled 'Tzei Ten Lo' and after they only said 'Chayav Atah Liten Lo'?

(d) According to Rava, what might Rebbi Yochanan then have answered, to reconcile his opinion with the Beraisa?

(a) We might also have established the Beraisa when one of two partners who stole a sheep, Shechted it without the second partner's consent.
Why would he be Patur from Daled ve'Hey?

(b) Then why did Rebbi Yochanan not give either of these answers? Why did he choose to answer when the Ganav ate it as a Neveilah?

(c) And what does Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan learn from the Pasuk "al Kol Aveidah Asher Yomar ... Yeshalem Shenayim"?

(a) The Beraisa learns from "Ki Yiten Ish", that one neither swears nor pays Kefel on the claim of a Katan.
What does he learn from the Pasuk "ad ha'Elohim Yavo D'var Sheneihem"?

(b) How does Rebbi Aba bar Mamal query Rebbi Yochanan from here? What should the Din here be according to Rebbi Yochanan?

(a) How do we establish the Beraisa to reconcile Rebbi Yochanan with it?

(b) Then what should the Tana have said rather than 'ad she'Tehei *Nesinah* u'Tevi'ah Shavin ke'Echad'?

(c) How do we answer this Kashya?

Next daf