Previous daf

1)

(a) One acquires ...

1. ... a flower-pot - by means of Meshichah (because it is considered Metaltelin).
2. ... seeds growing in a holed flower-pot - by means of Kesef, Sh'tar or Chazakah (because they are considered Karka.

(b) Weeding or digging constitutes a Chazakah with regard to seeds.

(c) Assuming the seeds belong to one person and the holed pot to another, it is therefore obvious that the owner of the seeds will acquire the pot through Meshichah, and the owner of the pot will acquire the seeds through Meshichah. If the pot and the seeds belong to one person, one can acquire them both simultaneously by making a Chazakah on the seeds alone - because of the Mishnah in Kidushin, which states that Metaltelin can be acquired together with Karka through Kesef, Sh'tar and Chazakah.

(d) Should he make a Chazakah on the pot alone (i.e. by using it for a specific purpose) - he will acquire neither the seeds nor even the pot.

(a) According to Abaye, if the hole in the pot is in Eretz Yisrael and the branch of a tree (which is growing on the other side of the pot, is in Chutz la'Aretz, we go after the hole - in which case, the fruit that subsequently grows on the tree is subject to Ma'asros min ha'Torah.

(b) According to Rava - we go after the branch, and the fruit is Patur from Ma'asros.

(c) Even Rava will agree that we go after the hole - once the tree has taken root in the ground via the hole.

(a) According to Rebbi Meir, whatever grows from the wall (of earth) in between two gardens that exist side by side in two tiers belongs to the owner of the upper-tier garden. According to Rebbi Yehudah - it belongs to the owner of the lower-tier garden.

(b) We attempt to prove from Rebbi Yehudah that - there are opinions that go after the branch, even though the roots are growing in someone else's property, clashing with what we just learned with regard to the flower-pot where the tree took root.

(c) In reply, we cite the reason that Rebbi Yehudah himself gives for his ruling. He says - that the owner of the lower-tier garden has the right to fill in his garden with earth, depriving his friend of the possibility of planting anything on the wall of his garden.

(d) Rebbi Meir's reason for declaring the owner of the top-tier as the owner of the vegetables is - that he has the right to excavate his garden and remove it completely, thereby depriving his friend of the wall.

(a) Rebbi says that the fruit of a tree that is growing partially in Eretz Yisrael and partly in Chutz la'Aretz - is all partially Tevel and partially Chulin.

(b) The ramifications of this ruling are - that one cannot separate Ma'asros from another source that is Vaday Tevel to cover this batch.

(c) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel says - 'ha'Gadeil be'Chiyuv, Chayav; ha'Gadeil bi'P'tur, Patur'.

(d) Based on the assumption that it is the branch that is growing partially in Eretz Yisrael and partly in Chutz la'Aretz, whilst the roots are growing entirely in Eretz Yisrael - we attempt to prove from here that we go after the branch even though the roots are growing elsewhere.

(a) If, as we conclude, the Tana is speaking when it is the roots that are divided, and not the branches. Nevertheless, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel divides the sap and the Kedushah into two - because the Beraisa is speaking when a rock divides them, enabling the sap and the Kedushah in the tree to remain divided, too.

(b) Rebbi's reason is - because, even though the sap initially enters the tree in two separate lots, once it reaches ground level, where the two parts of the tree merge into one, the sap does likewise.

(c) In a case where the roots of a tree grow in Eretz Yisrael, and its branch grows in Chutz la'Aretz - both Tana'im will agree that we go after the roots.

(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Asi Amar Ula lists three kinds of skin (parchment): Matzah, Cheifah - and Diftera.

(b) Matzah - has not been treated at all, neither with salt, nor with flour nor with gall-nuts (like regular Matzah, that comprises nothing more than flour and water, in order to minimize the chances of its becoming Chametz.

(c) We need to know this for the Shiur of carrying on Shabbos, which Abaye describes as 'Riv'a de'Riv'a de'Pumbedisa' - which in turn, is the smallest weight in Pumbedisa, which they would cover with 'Matzah'.

(d) Cheifah has been salted but not treated with flour, and also concerns the Shiur of carrying on Shabos. The minimum Shiur for carrying Cheifah on Shabbos - is when it is large enough to cover a Kamei'ah with it (which is why it is called 'Cheifah' [from the word 'Chofeh', to cover]).

(a) 'Diftera' is - skin that has been treated with salt and flour.

(b) We need to know this in connection with the Shiur for carrying out on Shabbos (like by Matzah and Cheifah) - which is large enough to write a Get on it.

(c) Rebbi Chiya bar Asi Amar Ula holds like - the Chachamim of Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseirah in our Mishnah, who validate a Get that is written on Diftera.

(a) 'K'laf' - is parchment that has been treated with salt, flour and gall-nuts.

(b) Rebbi Chiya bar Asi Amar Ula does not include it in his list - because K'laf no longer falls under the category of skin.

9)

(a) The Chachamim in our Mishnah who validate a Get that is written on paper even though it is possible to erase and change its contents - are none other than Rebbi Elazar (ben Shamua) who holds 'Eidei Mesirah Karsi'.

(b) Witnesses are required min ha'Torah (despite the fact that, according to Rebbi Elazar, "ve'Kasav Lah" refers to the Kesivah and not to the Chasimah) - because we learn a 'Gezeirah-Shavah "Davar" "Davar" from Mamon that 'Ein Davar she'be'Ervah Pachos mi'Shenayim'.

(c) We cannot argue that in the same way as the woman will produce the Eidei Mesirah who know what was written in the Sht'ar according to Rebbi Elazar, so too, will she produce the Eidei Chasimah according to Rebbi Meir - because Rebbi Meir does not require the witnesses who signed to testify, since any witnesses who recognize the signatures will suffice.

(a) According to Rebbi Elazar (ben P'das), the Chachamim only validate the Get which had already been written on and erased, 'immediately' - meaning on that day.

(b) The reason for this is - because we suspect that, once the first day has passed, the witnesses themselves may have forgotten the details that were written on the Sh'tar, and will no longer be reliable (though we are not afraid of this when the Sh'tar is above board).

(c) Rebbi Yochanan permits even up to ten days.

(a) Rebbi Elazar also restricts Rebbi Elazar in our Mishnah to Gitin, but not to other Sh'taros - because by Gitin (which are not intended to claim with), she can be expected to take the Sh'tar to Beis-Din immediately to have it substantiated, and to receive permission to remarry. This creates a Kol, which will later suffice to enable her to marry when the time comes. But regarding monetary issues (where the purpose of the Sh'tar is to claim with), the claimant will not normally produce the Sh'tar until it falls due for payment, by which time we are afraid that the witnesses may have forgotten the details. As proof, he quotes the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "u'Nesatem bi'Ch'li Cheres ... ", which teaches us that Sh'taros are expected to last a long time.

(b) Rebbi Yochanan disagrees. According to him, the Pasuk in Yirmiyah - is merely giving good advice (but not teaching us Halachos).

(a) Our Mishnah states - that a 'Chashu' (Cheresh, Shoteh ve'Katan) may write a Get.

(b) The problem with someone who does not have Da'as writing a Get is - that the Get needs to be written Lish'mah (something that someone without Da'as is incapable).

(c) Rav Huna resolves the problem - by establishing our Mishnah when a Gadol was supervising them, instructing them to write the Get Lish'mah.

(d) According to Rav Huna - the author of our Mishnah is Rebbi Elazar, who requires the Kesivah to be Lish'mah.

(a) According to Rav Huna's interpretation of our Mishnah, the Seifa 'she'Ein Kiyum ha'Get Ela be'Chosamav' - comes to give a reason for the middle case (why the woman may write the Get and her husband the receipt).

(b) It cannot be referring to the Reisha - because if it did, it would be validating a Get that was written by a Cheresh, Shoteh ve'Katan, obviating the need for a Gadol to supervise them (and this is not what Rav Huna says).

(c) The Tana refers to the Eidei Mesirah as 'Chosamav' - because in the majority of cases, it is the Eidei Chasimah who also double as the Eidei Mesirah.