Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) CHALIPIN WHEN PARTICULAR ABOUT THE VALUE OF THE ITEMS

(a) (Rabah citing Rav Huna): Reuven held up money and said 'Sell me your item for this'; Shimon agreed (even though he could not see how much money it was) - the acquisition works, and Shimon can claim the Ona'ah (if the money is a sixth less than the item's value, Reuven must give the amount he underpaid).

1. The acquisition works, even though Reuven did not make Meshichah on the item - since Shimon was not concerned to see how much money was paid, this acquires, like Chalipin;
2. Shimon can claim the Ona'ah - since he said 'Sell' and not 'trade,' it is a sale (to which the law of Ona'ah applies), not Chalipin.

(b) (Rav Aba citing Rav Huna): Reuven held up money and said 'Sell me your item for this'; Shimon agreed - the acquisition works, and Shimon cannot claim the Ona'ah.
(c) Both agree that if the seller is not concerned to see how much money was paid, this acquires, like Chalipin;
(d) Question: What is the law regarding Chalipin when the seller is particular about how much money was paid? (Does it become like a Kinyan Kesef, and it is not final until a Meshichah takes place?)
(e) Answer (Rav Ada bar Ahavah - Beraisa): Reuven wanted to exchange his cow for Shimon's donkey. After asking each other the price, Shimon pulled the cow; the donkey died before Reuven pulled it - the cow was not acquired.

1. This teaches that when the seller is concerned how much money is paid, it is like a regular sale.

(f) Objection (Rava): People always care about the value, even by Chalipin!

1. The Beraisa is when Shimon wanted a cow and a lamb for his donkey; since he only pulled the cow, the acquisition was never completed.

(g) (Rav Huna): Reuven held up money and said 'Sell me your item for this'; Shimon agreed - the acquisition works, and Shimon can claim the Ona'ah.
(h) Suggestion: Rav Huna (who says that he acquires because it is like Chalipin) says that coins can be acquired through Chalipin.
(i) Rejection: No - rather, he agrees with R. Yochanan, that mid'Oraisa, money acquires Metaltelim;

1. Chachamim enacted that Meshichah acquires (and not money), lest someone will sell something in his house and be slothful about saving it from a fire for it already belongs to the buyer and he has nothing to gain by saving it;
2. Chachamim only decreed in the usual case (when the seller is concerned about the money) however in this case we rule that the money acquires without Meshichah.

(j) (Mar Huna brei d'Rav Nachman): We learned that Rav Huna explicitly said that coins cannot be acquired through Chalipin.

(a) Question: Whose vessel is used to make Chalipin?
(b) Answer #1 (Rav): The buyer's - he wants the seller to get his vessel, in order that the seller will decide absolutely that the buyer should get the commodity.
(c) Answer #2 (Levi): The seller's (we will explain why later).
(d) Question (Rav Huna of Diskarta): According to Levi, the seller gives land (through Chalipin) by giving a vessel - but a Mishnah teaches just the contrary!

1. (Mishnah): Metaltelim are acquired along with land.

(e) Answer (Rava): The vessel does not acquire the land - rather, with the pleasure the seller gets that the buyer accepted his vessel, he decides absolutely to give the land.
(f) Tana'im argue as Rav and Levi argue.

1. (Beraisa): "Al ha'Ge'ulah...he gave his shoe to the other": "Geulah" refers to a sale; "Teudah" refers to Chalipin;
2. Question: 'Lekayem Kol Davar Shalaf Ish Na'alo" - who gave his shoe to whom?
3. Answer #1: Bo'az (who was acquiring rights to (redeem) the field) gave to the (closer) redeemer.
4. Answer #1 R. Yehudah: The redeemer gave to Bo'az.

(g) (Beraisa): A vessel makes Chalipin, even if it is not worth a Perutah.
(h) (Rav Nachman): That is only by a vessel - but produce does not work.
(i) (Rav Sheshes): Even produce works.
(j) Question: What is Rav Nachman's reason?
(k) Answer: The verse speaks of a shoe (to show that a vessel is needed)!
(l) Question: How does Rav Sheshes explain this?
(m) Answer: "Na'alo" teaches that something complete must be used - this excludes half a fruit.
(n) Question (Rav Sheshes brei d'Rav Idi): We write in documents '(we acquired) with a vessel proper to acquire with it' - whom does this follow?
(o) Answer: 'A vessel' excludes Rav Sheshes' opinion, that produce is valid; 'proper' excludes Shmuel's opinion, that Marka (Rashi - vessels of dung; Tosfos - date pits) may be used;

1. 'To acquire' - not to make (the other) acquire (i.e. the vessel is of the one acquiring);
2. Version #1 (Rav Papa): 'With it' excludes coins;
3. (Rav Zvid): 'With it' excludes something forbidden to benefit from it.
4. Version #2 (Rav Papa): 'With it' excludes coins;
5. (Rav Zvid): 'Valid' excludes something forbidden to benefit from it;

i. Obviously, Marka is invalid, the text need not allude to it.

(a) (Mishnah): An Asimon acquires coins...
(b) Question: What is an Asimon?
(c) Answer #1 (Rav): Coins given as a sign in the bathhouse (that one paid for a bath).
(d) Question (Mishnah): We cannot redeem Ma'aser Sheni on an Asimon, nor on coins given as a sign in the bathhouse.

1. This says that they are two different things!
2. Suggestion: Perhaps the Mishnah explains - an Asimon is a coin given as a sign in the bathhouse.
3. Rejection (Mishnah - R. Dosa): We can not redeem Ma'aser Sheni on an Asimon;
4. Chachamim say, we can redeem on it;

i. Both agree that we cannot redeem on coins given as a sign in the bathhouse.

(e) Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): Rather, an Asimon is a blank coin.
(f) This is as R. Yochanan said elsewhere.

1. (R. Yochanan): R. Dosa (brought above) and R. Yishmael agree with each other.
2. (Beraisa - R. Yishmael): "V'Tzarta ha'Kesef b'Yadecha" - this includes anything that may be Nitzrar (wrapped) in the hand;
3. R. Akiva says, this includes any (coin) that has a Tzurah (form, i.e. mintage).

(a) (Mishnah): If Reuven made Meshichah on Shimon's produce to buy it and did not yet pay, Shimon cannot retract...
(b) (R. Yochanan): Mid'Oraisa, money acquires Metaltelim;

1. Chachamim enacted that Meshichah acquires (and not money), lest someone will sell something in his house and then tell him 'It burned in a fire'.
2. Question: The buyer will collect from the one responsible for the fire!
3. Answer: Rather, the concern is that a fire will erupt through Ones.

i. If the item belongs to the seller (until Meshichah) - he will strive to save it; if it belongs to the buyer, he will not strive to save it.

(c) (Reish Lakish): The Torah explicitly teaches that Meshichah acquires.
(d) Question: What is the source?
(e) Answer: "Kanoh Miyad Amisecha" - something that is passed from hand to hand (is acquired).
(f) R. Yochanan explains, "Miyad" excludes land from the law of Ona'ah.
(g) Reish Lakish: To teach only that, it should have said 'When you will sell Miyad Amisecha' - "O Kano" is extra, to teach Meshichah.
(h) Question: What does R. Yochanan learn from "O Kano"
(i) Answer (Beraisa): "V'chi Timkeru Memkar...Al Tonu" - this would only teach when the buyer was afflicted (overpaid);

1. "O Kano...Al Tonu" includes when the seller was afflicted (the buyer underpaid).

(j) Reish Lakish learns both laws from "O Kano".
(k) Question (against Reish Lakish - Mishnah): R. Shimon says, whoever is holding the money has the upper hand.

1. The seller can retract, not the buyer.
2. We understand this if (mid'Oraisa) coins acquire - it sufficed to enact that the seller can retract (he will save the item in order to profit - if it rises in value, he will cancel the sale).
3. But according to Reish Lakish, coins do not acquire (mid'Oraisa or mid'Rabanan) - why can't the buyer retract?

(l) Answer (Reish Lakish): Indeed, R. Shimon holds as R. Yochanan - I explain Chachamim.
(m) According to Reish Lakish, we understand the argument between Chachamim and R. Shimon.
(n) Question: According to R. Yochanan, on what do they argue?
(o) Answer: Rav Chisda's law.

1. (Rav Chisda): Just as it was enacted that sellers can retract until Meshichah was done, also regarding buyers.
2. Chachamim hold as Rav Chisda, R. Shimon does not.