Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

13) IS PARNASAH COLLECTED FROM SOLD PROPERTY?

(a) Question (Rav): What is the law when brothers diverted the property to others?

1. R. Chiya was by Rebbi when this question arrived. R. Chiya: Does he mean, they sold the property, or gave it as collateral?

(b) Answer (Rebbi): It makes no difference - either way, Parnasah is collected from it, but not food.

1. Question: Why didn't Rav specify, if they sold it or gave it as collateral?
2. Answer: Rav wanted to know the law by both.

i. If he asked the law when they sold it - if the answer was, it is collected, all the more so, if they gave it as collateral; but if the answer was, it is not collected, he would not know the law if they gave it as collateral.
ii. If he asked the law when they gave it as collateral - if the answer was, it is not collected, all the more so, if they sold it; but if the answer was, it is collected, he would not know the law if they sold it.
iii. Therefore, he phrased his question in a way that includes both.

(c) (R. Yochanan): We do not collect for food nor for Parnasah.
(d) Question: Did R. Yochanan not hear Rebbi's ruling - but had he heard it, he would have retracted his own ruling? Or, had R. Yochanan heard it, but nevertheless argued?

1. Suggestion: We can learn from the following that he had heard.
2. (R. Yochanan): A man died, leaving 2 daughters and a son. 1 daughter took Parnasah; the son died before the other daughter received Parnasah - she loses her Parnasah (and splits the remaining property with her sister);
3. (R. Chanina): Even more than this - they said, Parnasah is taken from sold property - how can you say, she loses it?

i. If R. Yochanan had not heard Rebbi's ruling, he should have asked - 'Who says that Parnasah is taken from sold property?" (since he himself argues).

4. Rejection: This is no proof - it can be, R. Yochanan had not heard! When R. Chanina told him that Rebbi said it, R. Yochanan accepted the ruling - but he persisted to argue on R. Chanina, since in this case, the daughter receives much property anyway.

(e) Question (Rav Yemar): According to R. Yochanan - if a daughter finds an object, and has money - she loses Parnasah?!
(f) Answer (Rav Ashi): This was only said when she receives a large share of the estate.

(a) (Ameimar): A daughter receiving Parnasah is considered an heir.
(b) Question (Rav Ashi): If so - the sons cannot force her to accept money (if she wants 1/10 of the land)?
(c) Answer (Ameimar): Correct!
(d) Question (Rav Ashi): If the sons want her to take the land in one place - can she demand 1/10 of each piece of land?
(e) Answer (Ameimar): Correct!
(f) (Rav Ashi): She is considered as a creditor.
(g) Ameimar subsequently retracted, and agreed to Rav Ashi.

1. (Rav Minyumi): I saw a case come before Ameimar - I could see, he held that the brothers could force her to accept money.

i. The brothers said - 'If we had money, we could force you to take it instead of the land', and Ameimar was silent.

(h) Question: Granted, she is as a creditor - but of the father, or of the brothers?

1. If she is a creditor of the brothers - she collects middle quality land, without an oath (as a regular lender collects from the borrower).
2. If she is a creditor of the father - she collects low quality land, with an oath (as a lender collects from heirs of the borrower).

(i) Answer: The following episode proves, she is a creditor of the brothers.

1. Ravina authorized Rav Ashi's daughter to collect middle quality land from her brother without an oath.

i. She also collected low quality land from the son of a deceased brother, with an oath (since she was a creditor of the deceased brother, and was collecting from his heir).

(j) Rav Nechemyah sent to Rabah Bar Rav Huna that a certain woman should collect Parnasah even from the base of a millstone.
(k) Rav Ashi: When I was by Rav Kahana, we used to collect for women even from rental of houses.
(l) Rav Anan sent a message to Rav Huna. 'Huna our colleague, Shalom! When this woman comes before you, she should collect a 10th of the estate.

1. Rav Huna (to Rav Sheshes): Say the following to Rav Anan - verbatim - if not, you will be in Cherem (excommunication)!
2. 'Anan, Anan - from land, or from Metaltelim? Also - who sits at the head in the house of Marzicha?'
3. Rav Sheshes delivered the message verbatim, but first apologized to Rav Anan: 'You are greater than me; Rav Huna is greater than you; he said I will be in Cherem if I do not give this message - otherwise, I would not say it! Anan, Anan ...'
4. Rav Anan consulted with Mar Ukva. 'Do you see how he treated me? Also - what is Marzicha?'

5. Mar Ukva: What is the full story? Rav Anan explained.
6. Mar Ukva: You do not know what Marzicha is, and you called Rav Huna 'our colleague'?

(m) Question: What is Marzicha?
(n) Answer: A mourner - "Do not come to a house of Marzach".
(o) Question (R. Avahu): How do we know that a mourner sits at the head?
(p) Answer #1 (R. Avahu): "I will choose their ways and sit at the head ... as mourners Yinachem".

1. Question: "Yinachem" implies consoling others!
2. Answer (Rav Nachman Bar Yitzchak): It is written "Yinachem" (he will be consoled).

(q) Answer #2 (Mar Zutra): "v'Sar Marzach Seruchim" - a mourner becomes a Sar (leader) to consolers.
(r) (Rava): The law is - for feeding a widow and daughters, for paying a Kesuvah, and giving a dowry to daughters - these are taken only from land, not from Metaltelim.

(a) (Mishnah - R. Meir): One who puts his money by a 3rd party to give to his daughter - she says, I trust my husband, the 3rd party should do as he was instructed;
(b) R. Yosi says, this is like a field, and she wants to sell it - it is as if it is already sold!
(c) This applies to an adult; but the actions of a minor are void.
(d) (Gemara - Beraisa - R. Meir): One who puts his money by a 3rd party to give to his son-in-law, to buy a field for his daughter, and she says, give it to my husband - if she has had Nisu'in, we heed her; if she is engaged, the 3rd party should do as he was instructed;
(e) R. Yosi says, an adult, whether fully married or engaged, we heed her; a minor, whether fully married or engaged, the 3rd party should do as he was instructed.
(f) Question: In which cases do they argue?

1. Suggestion: A married minor - R. Meir says, we heed her; R. Yosi says, even by full marriage, only an adult is heeded.
2. Question: But the Mishnah ends, 'but the actions of a minor are void' - who taught this?

i. Suggestion: If R. Yosi - but he already said, 'it is as a field she wants to sell' - we know he is only talking about an adult, who can sell!

3. Answer: Rather, R. Meir taught it, and the Mishnah left out words; it means as follows:
4. (Mishnah): The 3rd party should do as he was instructed - this refers to engagement; but from full marriage, we heed her. This refers to an adult; but the actions of a minor are void.

(g) Answer: They argue by an engaged adult.
(h) (Rav Yehudah): The law is as R. Yosi.
(i) (Rava): The law is as R. Meir.
(j) Ilfa hung himself on a mast. 'If anyone can say a Tosefta of R. Chiya and R. Oshiya, for which I cannot bring its source in the Mishnah, I will fall and drown!'

1. An elder asked the source of this Tosefa: One who says, 'Give a Shekel to my children each week, and they are worthy to get a Sela - we give them a Sela; if he said, only give them a Shekel, we only give them a Shekel;

i. If he said, if they die, others should inherit in place of them, whether or not he said 'only', we only give them a Shekel.

2. Ilfa: That is as R. Meir, who says it is a Mitzvah to fulfill the words of the deceased.