Previous daf

1)

(a) If the Beis-Din wrote a Pesicha on someone who ignored a summons, they only tear it up - when he actually appears in Beis-Din, not when he agrees to go. In the meantime, the Cherem remains in effect.

(b) Initially, we issue the identical ruling in a case of someone on whom Beis-Din issued a Pesicha because he refused to abide by Beis-Din's ruling. We conclude however - that the moment he undertakes to do so, Beis-Din will already tear it up.

(c) If Beis-Din issue a summons on Monday, in the event that he refuses to attend - they will issue him with a second summons on the Thursday and a third summons on the following Monday. Should he continue to ignore the summons, they will write the Pesicha on Tuesday.

(d) The reason that Rav Kahana wrote a Pesicha on a woman the morning after the first summons is - because it is only in the case of a man, who is sometimes out of town, that one gives three chances, but not a woman, who is generally in town.

(a) Beis-Din will not issue a summons during the months of Nisan and Tishri - because everyone is busy with the harvest of the corn and the grapes respectively.

(b) Neither do they issue a summons - on Erev Shabbos or Erev Yom-Tov.

(c) Beis Din will however, issue a summons in Nisan or Tishri - to appear in Beis-Din in Iyar and Mar-Cheshvan, respectively.

(d) The same concession will not apply to ...

1. ... Erev Shabbos and Erev Yom-Tov - because everyone is busy with preparations for Shabbos and Yom-Tov, and they are likely to forget by the following week.
2. ... to those who come to the Kalah (to hear the D'rashah each Erev Shabbos) and the Rigla (to hear the D'rashah about Hilchos Chag before each Yom-Tov) - because the thought that they might be issued a summons will deter people from coming to hear the D'rashah.

(a) Rav Nachman would say to a claimant who approached him at the Kalah or the Rigla with a request to invite his disputant to a Din-Torah - that this was not why he had invited everyone to attend the D'rashah.

(b) They changed this Din however - due to swindlers, who would come into town for business, but, in order to avoid being summoned to a Din Torah, they would enter the Beis-ha'Medrash making out that they had come for the D'rashah.

(a) We learned in our Mishnah (with regard to 'ha'Gozel u'Ma'achil es Banav') 'Im Hayah Davar she'Yesh Bo Acharayus, Chayavin Le'shalem'. We have already cited Rebbi speaking to his son, Rebbi Shimon, who interprets 'Davar she'Yesh Bo Acharayus' to mean - that if the stolen object is something that is easily recognizable such as a cow for plowing and a laden donkey that he leads, then the heirs are obligated to return it, out of respect for their father.

(b) Rav Kahana asked Rav about a couch to recline on and a table to eat on, which might be different than a cow for plowing - because, unlike the former, they are situated inside one's home and are not in full view of the public.

(c) Rav replied 'Ten le'Chacham va'Yechkam Od' - meaning the latter are considered 'Davar she'Yesh Bo Acharayus' just like the former - since people who enter the home of the heirs will easily recognize them as property belonging to the original owner.

(a) Our Mishnah forbids the exchange of coins from a tax-collector's box, or from the purse of the collector of the king's head-tax - neither may one accept Tzedakah from them.

(b) All this is permitted however - if the money is taken (not from the box or the purse into which he places the money, but) from his private home or from his shop in the market.

(a) Despite the prohibition of changing coins from a tax-collector's box, the Beraisa permits someone who owes half a Dinar of taxes to give him a Dinar and to receive change - in order to spare himself the loss of half a Dinar.

(b) The problem with treating a tax-collector like a Ganav is - Shmuel's ruling 'Diyna de'Malchusa Diyna', which legalizes the non-Jewish tax system and obligates everyone to pay their dues.

(c) Rebbi Chanina bar Kahana Amar Shmuel establishes the Mishnah by taxes that are not fixed (where it is the tax-collector who fixes the amounts everyone has to pay). de'Bei Rebbi Yanai establishes it - by a self-appointed tax-collector (even if the amounts he collects are determined by the government).

(a) Others connect the above Machlokes Amora'im with the Mishnah in Kil'ayim. The Tana there - prohibits the wearing of Kil'ayim on top of ten garments in order to evade paying taxes.

(b) The Tana Kama of another Beraisa forbids it, too - Rebbi Shimon quoting Rebbi Akiva permits it.

(c) The basis of their Machlokes regarding the wearing of Kil'ayim is - 'Davar she'Eino Miskaven' (a sin that one performs unintentionally - with an entirely different motive), which the Tana Kama forbids, and Rebbi Shimon Amar Rebbi Akiva permits.

(d) In spite of Shmuel's ruling 'Diyna de'Malchusas Diyna', Rebbi Akiva permits the evasion of taxes - either because he is speaking about an amount that the tax-collector fixed it at his whim, or about a self-appointed tax-collector, as we explained above. Note, that nevertheless, the Tana Kama forbids it.

(a) Yet others connect the same Machlokes with a Mishnah in Nedarim. If Haragin, Charamin or Muchsin demand that one gives them fruit, the Tana there permits him - to make a Neder forbidding all fruit on oneself should they not be Terumah, or should they not be the king's property (even if they are not [see Tosfos DH 'Nodrin']).

(b) Charamin are trouble-shooters who rob people of their money or property.

(c) Rebbi Chanina bar Kahana Amar Shmuel establishes the Mishnah by taxes that are not fixed and de'Bei Rebbi Yanai, by a self-appointed tax-collector. Rav Ashi establishes it - by a Nochri tax-collector (where it is he presumably, and not the government, who bears the loss.

(d) Rav Ashi basis his ruling on a Beraisa. As a last resort, Rebbi Yishmael permits one to use force to avoid paying a Jew or a Nochri Anas who are claiming from him illegal taxes. To avoid using force - he is permitted to cite Jewish law or even secular law to avoid paying.

(a) Rebbi Akiva disagrees with Rebbi Yishmael - on account of the Chilul Hashem involved.

(b) He seems to agree with Rebbi Yishmael though - with regard to the Heter of Gezel Akum.

(c) When Rebbi Akiva came from Zafirin, he Darshened from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Acharei Nimkar, Ge'ulah Tih'yeh Lo" - that it is forbidden to take the Eved Ivri who is sold to a Nochri and march him to freedom without paying for him ('Gezel Akum Asur').
2. ... ve'Chishav Im Konehu" - that the Akum is not entitled to charge any price that suits him (only what he paid for him).

(d) Abaye refutes Rav Yosef's suggestion that Rebbi Akiva's latter ruling pertains to a Ger Toshav (who stops serving idols, though he continues to eat Neveilah), his former ruling, to a Nochri - on the basis of the Pasuk quoted by Rebbi Akiva, which incorporates both a Ger Toshav and a Nochri).

(e) Besides a Nochri and Ger Toshav, the Pasuk "ve'Nimkar le'Ger Toshav, O le'Eiker Mishpachas Ger" also incorporates (someone who is sold to work for) the Avodah-Zarah itself (which we learn from "O le'Eiker").

10)

(a) In spite of having concluded that Rebbi Akiva forbids Gezel Akum, Rava finally explains the inference from his previous statement (that if not for the Cilul Hashem, one would be permitted to avoid paying a Moches Nochri taxes) - because of the difference between stealing from a Nochri (which is forbidden) and withholding from him one's debts (which is permitted).

(b) Abaye asked why Rebbi Akiva is then strict with regard to releasing an Eved Ivri from the ownership of a Nochri, seeing as one is only depriving him of the Eved Ivri's work (which is no more than a debt). But we reply - that it is Rava who explains Rebbi Akiva in this light, and 'Rava le'Ta'amei' (Rava follows what he maintains elsewhere) that the master acquires an Eved Ivri [not just his work, but with a Kinyan ha'Guf]).

(c) Rav Bibi bar Gidal Amar Rebbi Shimon Chasida ...

1. ... learns from the Pasuk "ve'Achalta es Kol ha'Amim Asher Hashem Elokecha Nosen Lach" - that only the property of the nations that are under your jurisdictions is permitted to you, but not the property of other nations ('Gezel Akum Asur').
2. ... based on the D'rashah of Rav Chama bar Guri'ah Amar Rav , learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "le'Chol Aveidas Achicha" - that the obligation of returning a lost article is confined to one belonging to a Jew, but not if it belongs to a Nochri ('Aveidas Nochri Mutar').

(d) And in the same context, Ravina learns from the Pasuk there "u'Metzasah" - that this concession is not confined to not picking up the lost article of a Nochri, but that it even exempts someone who picked it up from returning it (because "u'Metzasah" implies that he has already picked it up).

(a) Rebbi Pinchas ben Ya'ir is strict even with regard to Aveidas Akum - if it involves Chilul Hashem.

(b) Shmuel paid a Nochri (who Chazal often refer to as Kutim) - three Dinrim for a golden dish. The Nochri erroneously - accepted the three Dinrim instead of four. In addition, he thought the dish was made of copper.

(c) Rav Kahana too, paid a Zuz less for the hundred jars that he bought from a Nochri (also through the Nochri's error). In addition, the Nochri miscounted and gave him twenty jars more than they had agreed.

(d) What did ...

1. When Ravina and a Nochri bought a palm-tree for firewood, Ravina instructed his servant - to count out the logs from the thick end, since he noticed that the Nochri was careful to count the logs, but didn't take note as to their thickness.
2. When they walked past a vine with clusters of grapes, Rav Ashi instructed his servant to - fetch him some grapes provided they belonged to a Kuti, but not if the owner was a Jew (see Tosfos and Shitah Mekubetzes).
3. When the owner, who overheard his instructions, queried him, Rav Ashi replied that whereas a Jew would refuse to take money, a Nochri would not (and he not want the grapes free of charge). (See Tosfos and Shitah Mekubetzes).

(a) From the fact that the municipal officers used to cut down palm-trees and make bridges, and everyone would use those bridges - Rava brings a proof for Shmuel, that 'Diyna de'Malchusa Diyna'.

(b) Abaye asked Rava forbids purchasing how we know that this is not because the owners were Meya'esh, to which Rava replied - because Yi'ush without Shinuy Reshus is not considered Yi'ush (see also Tosfos DH 'Heichi Meya'ashi').

(c) Despite the fact that the officers were instructed to cut down trees from each valley, and they cut them all from one valley, we refer to this as 'Diyna de'Malchusa' - because the officer of a king has, to a certain degree, the power of the king himself.

(d) Rava concludes that the residents of that particular valley have only themselves to blame - for not claiming reimbursement for all the trees that they should have provided.

(a) Rava states that if three partners already took their share of the crops home, and the fourth partner is still working in the barn when the tax man claims taxes from him, he pays the tax. By this he means - that the fourth partner pays for all the partners, from whom he may later reclaim what he laid out.

(b) The other ramifications of Rava's statement - are that the tax-collector has acted within his rights. On the assumption that he purchased the rights from the king, if he is a Jew, he is permitted to retain what he took, and in the event that he a Nochri, one is permitted to purchase it from him.

(c) In the equivalent case, where the fourth man is a resident-gardener - then he pays tax only for himself (since he is not a land-owner), and it is illegal for the tax-collector to claim the taxes of the others from him.

(a) Rava also permits the tax man to claim a security from Reuven on behalf of Shimon, if the latter is not available to pay his taxes, because of 'Diyna de'Malchusa'. Assuming that this applies both to land-taxes and to head-taxes, it will be prohibited - with regard to claiming last year's head-tax, since the tax-man has generally made up with the king and paid all his dues up to the end of the year.

(b) Rava forbids the purchase of animals from Nochrim who rent out their animals to manure fields, inside the T'chum (the city boundaries), but one may purchase them outside the T'chum (because the owners are Meya'esh). The basis of the prohibition is - the possibility of Jewish-owned animals having strayed over to the Nochri's, which now graze with his own animals, and which he has no authority to sell.

(c) Ravina forbids such a purchase even outside the T'chum - in the event that the owner of the animal is running after his animal (a sure sign that he has not been Meya'esh).