Previous daf

1)

(a) What does the Beraisa advise someone who is standing in his granary to do, if he wants to redeem his Ma'aser Sheini, but has no money on him?

(b) What does he gain by doing this? What do we learn from the Pasuk in Bechukosai "mi'Ma'asro"?

(c) What advantage would there have been had he had money on him?

(d) What do we prove from here?

(a) Why is the owner not Makneh a small piece of land to his friend, for his friend to redeem the Ma'aser on the money in the owner's house?

(b) But surely, if he has a granary, he must own land?

(a) How do we attempt to refute the proof from the above Beraisa that, just as a coin cannot acquire with Chalipin, so too, can one not acquire it with Chalipin either?

(b) What is the problem with this explanation?

(c) When Rav Shmuel bar Acha went to Mechuza, Rav Papa was Makneh him the twelve thousand Dinrim that the Bei Chuza'a owed him.
Why was this necessary? Why could he not simply claim the money as Rav Papa's Sheli'ach?

(d) How did Rav Papa demonstrate his joy at receiving his money back intact?

5)

(a) What do Ula, Rebbi Asi and Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan all say about using a coin as Chalipin?

(b) What does the Tana of a Beraisa advise someone to do if his employees are claiming their wages, and he has no money on him, provided he has money at home? What is a 'T'risis'?

(c) What Kashya did Rebbi Aba ask Ula from this Beraisa on the previous Sugya? What makes us think that the banker acquired the Dinar u'T'risis with Chalipin?

(a) Although Ula remained silent, he conceded that Rebbi Aba was right to establish the Beraisa by P'rutetos.
What are P'rutetos? How does this answer the Kashya?

(b) And he even supported his answer from the Lashon 'Yafeh Dinar u'T'risis'. What does that prove?

(c) Rav Ashi disagrees. The Kashya doesn't bother him in the first place, because the employer had money at home.
So what if he did?

(a) The Mishnah in Kidushin states 'Kol ha'Na'aseh Damim be'Acher, Keivan she'Zachah Zeh, Nischayev Zeh ba'Chalipin'. The simple interpretation of this Mishnah poses a Kashya on those who hold 'Ein Matbe'a Na'aseh Chalipin'.
What is the simple interpretation of the Mishnah?

(b) Rav Yehudah therefore interprets the Mishnah as 'Kol ha'Nishum Damim be'Acher ... '.
What does he mean by that?

(c) How do we prove this from the Seifa of the Mishnah 'Keitzad ... '. What does the Seifa of the Mishnah say?

8)

(a) According to our initial understanding of 'Kol ha'Nishum Damim be'Acher ... ' (which those who learn 'Matbe'a Na'aseh Chalipin' will have to adopt), how will we explain the Seifa 'Keitzad ... ?'

(b) This can only go like Rav Sheishes, but not like Rav Nachman. Why is that? What does ...

1. ... Rav Sheishes say?
2. ... Rav Nachman say?

(c) How will Rav Nachman explain ...

1. ... the Reisha of the Mishnah ('Kol ha'Na'aseh Damim be'Acher')?
2. ... the Seifa ('Keitzad, Hichlif Shor be'Parah ... )? If it does not refer to Chalipin, then what *does* it refer to?

(d) In view of the principle that money cannot acquire, this case must be an exception, due to the fact that Rav Nachman holds like Rebbi Yochanan.
What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan, why did Chazal negate Kinyan Kesef?

(b) What makes the case in the Mishnah different, according to Rav Nachman?

(c) What does Resh Lakish hold? Why can he not possibly explain the Mishnah like Rav Nachman?

(d) How will Resh Lakish therefore explain our Mishnah?

(a) We learned in our Mishnah 'Kol ha'Metaltelin Konin Zeh es Zeh'. Resh Lakish explains that the word 'Kol' comes to include a purse full of money.
What is the problem with that?

(b) How do we know that the Tana is speaking about Chalipin and not Kinyan Kesef?

(c) So Rav Acha establishes the Mishnah when one of the purses is full of coins taken out of circulation by the king, and the other one is full of coins that have simply lost favor with the people of that particular province.
What is the difference between the two?

(d) Once we know ...

1. ... that the former are no longer considered currency, why do we need the latter?
2. ... that the latter are no longer considered currency, why do we need the former?

Next daf