Search

Bava Batra 67

Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:

podcast placeholder

0:00
0:00




Summary

An unmarried woman whose father died can claim her dowry from up to one-tenth of the father’s estate. However, this amount can only be collected from 1/10 of the land of the father’s estate. Rav Nechemia, the son of Rav Yosef accorded a woman one-tenth of her father’s estate for her dowry and permitted the value of the estate to include moveable items that were attached to the ground as they are considered like land itself. Rav Ashi also included rental income from the father’s properties in the calculation for a daughter’s dowry. If one sold a courtyard, an olive press, or a bathhouse, what items are included in the sale, and what items are not included in the sale? Rabbi Eliezer disagrees with the mainstream opinion.

Today’s daily daf tools:

Bava Batra 67

אַגְבַּהּ עִישּׂוּר נִכְסֵי, אֲפִילּוּ מֵאִצְטְרוֹבְלֵי דְרֵיחַיִים. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: כִּי הֲוֵינַן בֵּי רַב כָּהֲנָא, מַגְבֵּינַן אֲפִילּוּ מֵעַמְלָא דְבָתֵּי.

collect for her one-tenth of her father’s estate, in keeping with the rabbinic ordinance that states that if a man dies, his sons are obligated to give his daughter a tenth of his landed properties as a dowry, and collect it even from his immovable lower millstones, as they too are considered landed property. Rav Ashi said: When we were students in Rav Kahana’s house we would collect for this purpose even from the rent of houses; since this money is earned from real estate, it too has the status of landed property and is included in the dowry calculations.

מַתְנִי׳ הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – מָכַר בָּתִּים, בּוֹרוֹת, שִׁיחִין וּמְעָרוֹת; אֲבָל לֹא אֶת הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הוּא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ – לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת הַמֶּרְחָץ, וְלֹא אֶת בֵּית הַבַּד שֶׁבְּתוֹכָהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – לֹא מָכַר אֶלָּא אֲוִירָהּ שֶׁל חָצֵר.

MISHNA: One who sells a courtyard without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the houses, pits, ditches, and caves found in the courtyard, but he has not sold the movable property. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the courtyard, even the movable property. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that includes the movable property, he has not sold the bathhouse, nor has he sold the olive press that is in the courtyard, as each is an entity with a discrete purpose and not an integral part of the courtyard. Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells a courtyard without specifying what is included in the sale has sold only the airspace, i.e., the open space, of the courtyard, but nothing found in the courtyard, not even the houses.

גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – מָכַר בָּתִּים הַחִיצוֹנִים, וּבָתִּים הַפְּנִימִים, וּבֵית הַחוֹלְסָאוֹת. חֲנוּיוֹת פְּתוּחוֹת לְתוֹכָהּ – נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ, וְשֶׁאֵין פְּתוּחוֹת לְתוֹכָהּ – אֵין נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ. פְּתוּחוֹת לְכָאן וּלְכָאן – [אֵלּוּ] וְאֵלּוּ נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – לֹא מָכַר אֶלָּא מִילוּסָא שֶׁל חָצֵר.

GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta, 3:1): One who sells a courtyard has sold with it the outer houses that can be accessed directly from the courtyard, and the inner houses that can be entered only via the outer houses, and the area of the sand fields [uveit haḥolsaot]. As for the stores, those that open into the courtyard are sold along with it; those that do not open into it, but rather open into the public domain, even if they are located in the courtyard, are not sold along with it; and those that open both into this courtyard and into that other public domain are grouped together with those that open into this courtyard alone, and both these and those are sold with it. Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells a courtyard without specifying what is included in the sale has sold only the open space of the courtyard.

אָמַר מָר: פְּתוּחוֹת לְכָאן וּלְכָאן – נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ. וְהָא תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: אֵין נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ! לָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא דְּרוֹב תַּשְׁמִישְׁתַּיְיהוּ לְגוֹ, הָא דְּרוֹב תַּשְׁמִישְׁתַּיְיהוּ לְבַר.

The Master said in the baraita: Stores that open both into this courtyard and into that public domain are sold along with the courtyard. The Gemara raises an objection: But didn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya teach a baraita that states that such stores are not sold with the courtyard? The Gemara answers that this is not difficult: This baraita, that teaches that the stores are sold along with the courtyard, is referring to a case where the majority of their use is from within, i.e., the stores are mainly accessed from within the courtyard, while that baraita of Rabbi Ḥiyya, that teaches that the stores are not sold along with the courtyard, is referring to a case where the majority of their use is from without, i.e., the stores are accessed mainly from the public domain.

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – לֹא מָכַר אֶלָּא אֲוִירָהּ שֶׁל חָצֵר. אָמַר רַבָּה: אִי דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״דֵּירְתָּא״ – דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּבָתֵּי מַשְׁמַע. כִּי פְּלִיגִי – דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״דָּרְתָּא״; מָר סָבַר: תַּרְבִּיצָא מַשְׁמַע, וּמָר סָבַר: בָּתֵּי מַשְׁמַע.

The mishna teaches, and it was similarly taught in the baraita, that Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells a courtyard has sold only the airspace of the courtyard, and he has sold nothing found in the courtyard, not even the houses. To clarify the disagreement between the unattributed opinion in the mishna and Rabbi Eliezer, Rabba said: If the seller said to the buyer that he is selling him dirata, i.e., the place of residence, everyone agrees that he means to sell the houses and that they are also included in the sale. When they disagree, it is where he said to him that he is selling him darta, i.e., the courtyard. One Sage, Rabbi Eliezer, holds that he means to sell only the garden, i.e., the space between the houses, and one Sage, the unattributed first opinion in the mishna, holds that he means to sell also the houses.

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַבָּה: אִי דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ ״דָּרְתָּא״ – דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּבָתֵּי מַשְׁמַע. כִּי פְּלִיגִי, דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״חָצֵר״; מָר סָבַר: חָצֵר – אַוֵּירָא מַשְׁמַע, וּמָר סָבַר: כַּחֲצַר הַמִּשְׁכָּן.

Some state a different version of this discussion, according to which Rabba says: If the seller says to the buyer that he is selling him darta, everyone agrees that he means to sell also the houses and that they are included in the sale. When they disagree, it is where he said to him that he is selling him the ḥatzer, the Hebrew term for courtyard. One Sage, Rabbi Eliezer, holds that when he says ḥatzer, he means to sell him only the airspace, i.e., the open space of the courtyard itself, and one Sage, the unattributed first opinion in the mishna, holds that houses are also included in the sale, just as the courtyard of the Tabernacle included the Tabernacle itself.

וְאָמַר רַבָּה אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: מָכַר לוֹ חוֹלְסִית וּמְצוּלָה; הֶחְזִיק בַּחוֹלְסִית – לֹא קָנָה מְצוּלָה, הֶחְזִיק בַּמְּצוּלָה – לֹא קָנָה חוֹלְסִית. אִינִי?! וְהָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מָכַר לוֹ עֶשֶׂר שָׂדוֹת בְּעֶשֶׂר מְדִינוֹת, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֶחְזִיק בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן – קָנָה כּוּלָּן!

§ And Rabba says that Rav Naḥman says: If one sold another a sand field for glass making, and a pond for fishing or some other purpose, if the buyer took possession of the sand field in order to finalize the transaction, he has not acquired the pond and must therefore perform a separate act of acquisition for it. Conversely, if he took possession of the pond, he has not acquired the sand field. The Gemara asks: Is that so? But doesn’t Shmuel say: If one sold another ten fields in ten different regions, all in a single bill of sale, once he takes possession of one of them, he has acquired them all; and the two cases seem to be analogous.

הָתָם הוּא דְּסַדָּנָא דְאַרְעָא חַד הוּא, וְכוּלַּהּ חֲדָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא הוּא; אֲבָל הָכָא – הָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד, וְהָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד.

The Gemara rejects the parallel: There, in the case of the ten fields, the land is all located in one geographic block, and it all has one use, i.e., to be farmed. The buyer, therefore, acquires all of the fields when he takes possession of one of them, even if they are not adjacent. But here, in the case of the sand field and the pond, this, the sand field, has a distinct use, i.e., to supply sand for glass making, and that, the pond, has a distinct use, i.e., for fishing. Therefore, taking possession of one of them does not effect a transfer of the other.

וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי,

And some state a different version of the previous discussion.

אָמַר רַבָּה אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: הֶחְזִיק בַּחוֹלְסִית – קָנָה מְצוּלָה. פְּשִׁיטָא – דְּהָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מָכַר לוֹ עֶשֶׂר שָׂדוֹת וְכוּ׳! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: הָתָם הוּא דְּסַדָּנָא דְאַרְעָא חַד הוּא, אֲבָל הָכָא – הָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד, וְהָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

Rabba actually said that Rav Naḥman said: If one sold another a sand field and a pond, and the buyer took possession of the sand field, he has also acquired the pond. The Gemara asks: This is obvious, as Shmuel says: If one sold ten fields to another in ten different regions, once he takes possession of one of them, he has acquired them all. The Gemara explains why Rav Naḥman’s statement was nevertheless necessary: It is necessary lest you say that there, in the case of the ten fields, the land is all located in one geographic block with a single use, and therefore all the fields are acquired together. But here, in the case of the sand field and the pond, this, the sand field, has a distinct use, and that, the pond, has a distinct use, and therefore taking possession of one of them should not effect acquisition of the other. Therefore, Rav Naḥman teaches us that if the buyer took possession of the sand field, he has acquired the pond as well.

מַתְנִי׳ הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת הַיָּם וְאֶת הַמֶּמֶל וְאֶת הַבְּתוּלוֹת, אֲבָל לֹא מָכַר אֶת הָעֲבִירִים וְאֶת הַגַּלְגַּל וְאֶת הַקּוֹרָה. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הוּא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת הַקּוֹרָה.

MISHNA: One who sells an olive press without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the yam and the memel and the betulot, the immovable elements of the olive press. But he has not sold with it the avirim and the galgal and the kora, the movable utensils of the olive press. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the olive press, even the movable utensils. Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells an olive press has sold the kora as well, as it is the most fundamental element of the olive press.

גְּמָ׳ ״יָם״ – טְלָפְחָא. ״מֶמֶל״ – אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר מֶמֶל: מַפְרַכְתָּא. ״בְּתוּלוֹת״ – אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּלוֹנְסוֹת שֶׁל אֶרֶז, שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִין בָּהֶן אֶת הַקּוֹרָה. ״עֲבִירִים״ – כִּבְשֵׁי. ״גַּלְגַּל״ – חוּמַרְתָּא. ״קוֹרָה״ – קוֹרָה.

GEMARA: The Gemara explains the terms used in the mishna. The yam is the lentil, the round stationary container into which the olives are placed before being crushed. As for the memel, Rabbi Abba bar Memel said: This is the crusher, the utensil used to pound and crush the olives. As for the betulot, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: These are the cedar posts [klonsot] that support the beam of the olive press. The avirim are the pressers, wooden boards that are placed on top of the crushed olives, and upon which the beam is lowered in order to press the olives. The galgal is the ḥumrata, a round stone that is placed on the beam to weigh it down. The kora is the heavy wooden beam used to press down upon the olives and thereby extract the oil.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת [הַ]נְּסָרִים, וְאֶת הַיְּקָבִים, וְאֶת הַמַּפְרֵכוֹת, וְאֶת הָרֵיחַיִם הַתַּחְתּוֹנוֹת – אֲבָל לֹא הָעֶלְיוֹנָה. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הוּא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ – לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת הָעֲבִירִים, וְלֹא אֶת הַשַּׂקִּין, וְלֹא אֶת הַמַּרְצוּפִין.

The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta, 3:2): One who sells an olive press without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the boards that are fixed in place to hold the olives; and the vats for collecting the oil, and the crushers, used to pound and crush the olives before pressing them, and the lower millstone, i.e., the stationary millstone base; but not the upper millstone. But when the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that he is selling everything that is in the olive press, he has not sold the wooden boards that are placed on top of the crushed olives when they are being pressed, nor has he sold the sacks, nor has he sold the leather bags for carrying the olives, as these are all movable goods that are not specifically part of the olive press.

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת הַקּוֹרָה, שֶׁלֹּא נִקְרָא בֵּית הַבַּד אֶלָּא עַל שׁוּם קוֹרָה.

Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells an olive press has sold the heavy wooden beam used to press down upon the olives, as it is called an olive press [beit habad] only due to this beam, the most essential part of the press, and this beam is otherwise known as a bad.

מַתְנִי׳ הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הַמֶּרְחָץ – לֹא מָכַר אֶת הַנְּסָרִין, וְאֶת הַסְּפָלִין, וְאֶת הַבֵּלָנִיּוֹת. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הִיא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָהּ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ – לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת הַמְּגוּרוֹת שֶׁל מַיִם, וְלֹא אֶת אוֹצָרוֹת שֶׁל עֵצִים.

MISHNA: One who sells a bathhouse without specifying what is included in the sale has not sold with it the boards that are placed on the floor, nor has he sold the basins or the curtains [habilaniyot]. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the bathhouse. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that he is selling everything that is in the bathhouse, he has not sold the tanks of water, nor has he sold the storerooms for wood, as an explicit sales agreement is required for these matters.

גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הַמֶּרְחָץ – מָכַר אֶת בֵּית הַנְּסָרִין, וְאֶת בֵּית הַיְּקָמִין, וְאֶת בֵּית הַסְּפָלִים, וְאֶת בֵּית הַוִּילָאוֹת; אֲבָל לֹא אֶת נְסָרִין עַצְמָן, וְלֹא יְקָמִין עַצְמָן, וְלֹא סְפָלִים עַצְמָן, וְלֹא וִילָאוֹת עַצְמָן. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הִיא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָהּ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ, לֹא מָכַר לוֹ אֶת הַבְּרֵיכוֹת הַמְסַפְּקוֹת לוֹ מַיִם – בֵּין

GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta, 3:3): One who sells a bathhouse without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the storeroom for the boards, and the storeroom for the implements called yekamin, and the storeroom for the basins, and the storeroom for the curtains [vilaot], but he has not sold the boards themselves, nor the yekamin themselves, nor the basins themselves, nor the curtains themselves. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the bathhouse. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that he is selling everything that is in the bathhouse, he has not sold him the pools that supply him with water, whether

Today’s daily daf tools:

Delve Deeper

Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.

For the Beyond the Daf shiurim offered in Hebrew, see here.

New to Talmud?

Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you. 

The Hadran Women’s Tapestry

Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories. 

I am a Reform rabbi and took Talmud courses in rabbinical school, but I knew there was so much more to learn. It felt inauthentic to serve as a rabbi without having read the entire Talmud, so when the opportunity arose to start Daf Yomi in 2020, I dove in! Thanks to Hadran, Daf Yomi has enriched my understanding of rabbinic Judaism and deepened my love of Jewish text & tradition. Todah rabbah!

Rabbi Nicki Greninger
Rabbi Nicki Greninger

California, United States

I decided to learn one masechet, Brachot, but quickly fell in love and never stopped! It has been great, everyone is always asking how it’s going and chering me on, and my students are always making sure I did the day’s daf.

Yafit Fishbach
Yafit Fishbach

Memphis, Tennessee, United States

I started my journey on the day I realized that the Siyum was happening in Yerushalayim and I was missing out. What? I told myself. How could I have not known about this? How can I have missed out on this opportunity? I decided that moment, I would start Daf Yomi and Nach Yomi the very next day. I am so grateful to Hadran. I am changed forever because I learn Gemara with women. Thank you.

Linda Brownstein
Linda Brownstein

Mitspe, Israel

I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.

Patti Evans
Patti Evans

Phoenix, Arizona, United States

I read Ilana Kurshan’s “If All the Seas Were Ink” which inspired me. Then the Women’s Siyum in Jerusalem in 2020 convinced me, I knew I had to join! I have loved it- it’s been a constant in my life daily, many of the sugiyot connect to our lives. My family and friends all are so supportive. It’s incredible being part of this community and love how diverse it is! I am so excited to learn more!

Shira Jacobowitz
Shira Jacobowitz

Jerusalem, Israel

I’ve been studying Talmud since the ’90s, and decided to take on Daf Yomi two years ago. I wanted to attempt the challenge of a day-to-day, very Jewish activity. Some days are so interesting and some days are so boring. But I’m still here.
Wendy Rozov
Wendy Rozov

Phoenix, AZ, United States

I started learning after the siyum hashas for women and my daily learning has been a constant over the last two years. It grounded me during the chaos of Corona while providing me with a community of fellow learners. The Daf can be challenging but it’s filled with life’s lessons, struggles and hope for a better world. It’s not about the destination but rather about the journey. Thank you Hadran!

Dena Lehrman
Dena Lehrman

אפרת, Israel

I started the daf at the beginning of this cycle in January 2020. My husband, my children, grandchildren and siblings have been very supportive. As someone who learned and taught Tanach and mefarshim for many years, it has been an amazing adventure to complete the six sedarim of Mishnah, and now to study Talmud on a daily basis along with Rabbanit Michelle and the wonderful women of Hadran.

Rookie Billet
Rookie Billet

Jerusalem, Israel

I heard the new Daf Yomi cycle was starting and I was curious, so I searched online for a women’s class and was pleasently surprised to find Rabanit Michelle’s great class reviews in many online articles. It has been a splendid journey. It is a way to fill my days with Torah, learning so many amazing things I have never heard before during my Tanach learning at High School. Thanks so much .

Martha Tarazi
Martha Tarazi

Panama, Panama

I learned daf more off than on 40 years ago. At the beginning of the current cycle, I decided to commit to learning daf regularly. Having Rabanit Michelle available as a learning partner has been amazing. Sometimes I learn with Hadran, sometimes with my husband, and sometimes on my own. It’s been fun to be part of an extended learning community.

Miriam Pollack
Miriam Pollack

Honolulu, Hawaii, United States

In early January of 2020, I learned about Siyyum HaShas and Daf Yomi via Tablet Magazine’s brief daily podcast about the Daf. I found it compelling and fascinating. Soon I discovered Hadran; since then I have learned the Daf daily with Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber. The Daf has permeated my every hour, and has transformed and magnified my place within the Jewish Universe.

Lisa Berkelhammer
Lisa Berkelhammer

San Francisco, CA , United States

I began my Daf Yomi journey on January 5, 2020. I had never learned Talmud before. Initially it struck me as a bunch of inane and arcane details with mind bending logic. I am now smitten. Rabbanit Farber brings the page to life and I am eager to learn with her every day!

Lori Stark
Lori Stark

Highland Park, United States

After enthusing to my friend Ruth Kahan about how much I had enjoyed remote Jewish learning during the earlier part of the pandemic, she challenged me to join her in learning the daf yomi cycle. I had always wanted to do daf yomi but now had no excuse. The beginning was particularly hard as I had never studied Talmud but has become easier, as I have gained some familiarity with it.

Susan-Vishner-Hadran-photo-scaled
Susan Vishner

Brookline, United States

I started learning Daf Yomi in January 2020 after watching my grandfather, Mayer Penstein z”l, finish shas with the previous cycle. My grandfather made learning so much fun was so proud that his grandchildren wanted to join him. I was also inspired by Ilana Kurshan’s book, If All the Seas Were Ink. Two years in, I can say that it has enriched my life in so many ways.

Leeza Hirt Wilner
Leeza Hirt Wilner

New York, United States

I am a Reform rabbi and took Talmud courses in rabbinical school, but I knew there was so much more to learn. It felt inauthentic to serve as a rabbi without having read the entire Talmud, so when the opportunity arose to start Daf Yomi in 2020, I dove in! Thanks to Hadran, Daf Yomi has enriched my understanding of rabbinic Judaism and deepened my love of Jewish text & tradition. Todah rabbah!

Rabbi Nicki Greninger
Rabbi Nicki Greninger

California, United States

I began daf yomi in January 2020 with Brachot. I had made aliya 6 months before, and one of my post-aliya goals was to complete a full cycle. As a life-long Tanach teacher, I wanted to swim from one side of the Yam shel Torah to the other. Daf yomi was also my sanity through COVID. It was the way to marking the progression of time, and feel that I could grow and accomplish while time stopped.

Leah Herzog
Leah Herzog

Givat Zev, Israel

A few years back, after reading Ilana Kurshan’s book, “If All The Seas Were Ink,” I began pondering the crazy, outlandish idea of beginning the Daf Yomi cycle. Beginning in December, 2019, a month before the previous cycle ended, I “auditioned” 30 different podcasts in 30 days, and ultimately chose to take the plunge with Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle. Such joy!

Cindy Dolgin
Cindy Dolgin

HUNTINGTON, United States

Having never learned Talmud before, I started Daf Yomi in hopes of connecting to the Rabbinic tradition, sharing a daily idea on Instagram (@dafyomiadventures). With Hadran and Sefaria, I slowly gained confidence in my skills and understanding. Now, part of the Pardes Jewish Educators Program, I can’t wait to bring this love of learning with me as I continue to pass it on to my future students.

Hannah-G-pic
Hannah Greenberg

Pennsylvania, United States

Studying has changed my life view on הלכה and יהדות and time. It has taught me bonudaries of the human nature and honesty of our sages in their discourse to try and build a nation of caring people .

Goldie Gilad
Goldie Gilad

Kfar Saba, Israel

Attending the Siyyum in Jerusalem 26 months ago inspired me to become part of this community of learners. So many aspects of Jewish life have been illuminated by what we have learned in Seder Moed. My day is not complete without daf Yomi. I am so grateful to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Community.

Nancy Kolodny
Nancy Kolodny

Newton, United States

Bava Batra 67

אַגְבַּהּ עִישּׂוּר נִכְסֵי, אֲפִילּוּ מֵאִצְטְרוֹבְלֵי דְרֵיחַיִים. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: כִּי הֲוֵינַן בֵּי רַב כָּהֲנָא, מַגְבֵּינַן אֲפִילּוּ מֵעַמְלָא דְבָתֵּי.

collect for her one-tenth of her father’s estate, in keeping with the rabbinic ordinance that states that if a man dies, his sons are obligated to give his daughter a tenth of his landed properties as a dowry, and collect it even from his immovable lower millstones, as they too are considered landed property. Rav Ashi said: When we were students in Rav Kahana’s house we would collect for this purpose even from the rent of houses; since this money is earned from real estate, it too has the status of landed property and is included in the dowry calculations.

מַתְנִי׳ הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – מָכַר בָּתִּים, בּוֹרוֹת, שִׁיחִין וּמְעָרוֹת; אֲבָל לֹא אֶת הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הוּא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ – לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת הַמֶּרְחָץ, וְלֹא אֶת בֵּית הַבַּד שֶׁבְּתוֹכָהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – לֹא מָכַר אֶלָּא אֲוִירָהּ שֶׁל חָצֵר.

MISHNA: One who sells a courtyard without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the houses, pits, ditches, and caves found in the courtyard, but he has not sold the movable property. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the courtyard, even the movable property. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that includes the movable property, he has not sold the bathhouse, nor has he sold the olive press that is in the courtyard, as each is an entity with a discrete purpose and not an integral part of the courtyard. Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells a courtyard without specifying what is included in the sale has sold only the airspace, i.e., the open space, of the courtyard, but nothing found in the courtyard, not even the houses.

גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – מָכַר בָּתִּים הַחִיצוֹנִים, וּבָתִּים הַפְּנִימִים, וּבֵית הַחוֹלְסָאוֹת. חֲנוּיוֹת פְּתוּחוֹת לְתוֹכָהּ – נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ, וְשֶׁאֵין פְּתוּחוֹת לְתוֹכָהּ – אֵין נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ. פְּתוּחוֹת לְכָאן וּלְכָאן – [אֵלּוּ] וְאֵלּוּ נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – לֹא מָכַר אֶלָּא מִילוּסָא שֶׁל חָצֵר.

GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta, 3:1): One who sells a courtyard has sold with it the outer houses that can be accessed directly from the courtyard, and the inner houses that can be entered only via the outer houses, and the area of the sand fields [uveit haḥolsaot]. As for the stores, those that open into the courtyard are sold along with it; those that do not open into it, but rather open into the public domain, even if they are located in the courtyard, are not sold along with it; and those that open both into this courtyard and into that other public domain are grouped together with those that open into this courtyard alone, and both these and those are sold with it. Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells a courtyard without specifying what is included in the sale has sold only the open space of the courtyard.

אָמַר מָר: פְּתוּחוֹת לְכָאן וּלְכָאן – נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ. וְהָא תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: אֵין נִמְכָּרוֹת עִמָּהּ! לָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא דְּרוֹב תַּשְׁמִישְׁתַּיְיהוּ לְגוֹ, הָא דְּרוֹב תַּשְׁמִישְׁתַּיְיהוּ לְבַר.

The Master said in the baraita: Stores that open both into this courtyard and into that public domain are sold along with the courtyard. The Gemara raises an objection: But didn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya teach a baraita that states that such stores are not sold with the courtyard? The Gemara answers that this is not difficult: This baraita, that teaches that the stores are sold along with the courtyard, is referring to a case where the majority of their use is from within, i.e., the stores are mainly accessed from within the courtyard, while that baraita of Rabbi Ḥiyya, that teaches that the stores are not sold along with the courtyard, is referring to a case where the majority of their use is from without, i.e., the stores are accessed mainly from the public domain.

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הֶחָצֵר – לֹא מָכַר אֶלָּא אֲוִירָהּ שֶׁל חָצֵר. אָמַר רַבָּה: אִי דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״דֵּירְתָּא״ – דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּבָתֵּי מַשְׁמַע. כִּי פְּלִיגִי – דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״דָּרְתָּא״; מָר סָבַר: תַּרְבִּיצָא מַשְׁמַע, וּמָר סָבַר: בָּתֵּי מַשְׁמַע.

The mishna teaches, and it was similarly taught in the baraita, that Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells a courtyard has sold only the airspace of the courtyard, and he has sold nothing found in the courtyard, not even the houses. To clarify the disagreement between the unattributed opinion in the mishna and Rabbi Eliezer, Rabba said: If the seller said to the buyer that he is selling him dirata, i.e., the place of residence, everyone agrees that he means to sell the houses and that they are also included in the sale. When they disagree, it is where he said to him that he is selling him darta, i.e., the courtyard. One Sage, Rabbi Eliezer, holds that he means to sell only the garden, i.e., the space between the houses, and one Sage, the unattributed first opinion in the mishna, holds that he means to sell also the houses.

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַבָּה: אִי דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ ״דָּרְתָּא״ – דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּבָתֵּי מַשְׁמַע. כִּי פְּלִיגִי, דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״חָצֵר״; מָר סָבַר: חָצֵר – אַוֵּירָא מַשְׁמַע, וּמָר סָבַר: כַּחֲצַר הַמִּשְׁכָּן.

Some state a different version of this discussion, according to which Rabba says: If the seller says to the buyer that he is selling him darta, everyone agrees that he means to sell also the houses and that they are included in the sale. When they disagree, it is where he said to him that he is selling him the ḥatzer, the Hebrew term for courtyard. One Sage, Rabbi Eliezer, holds that when he says ḥatzer, he means to sell him only the airspace, i.e., the open space of the courtyard itself, and one Sage, the unattributed first opinion in the mishna, holds that houses are also included in the sale, just as the courtyard of the Tabernacle included the Tabernacle itself.

וְאָמַר רַבָּה אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: מָכַר לוֹ חוֹלְסִית וּמְצוּלָה; הֶחְזִיק בַּחוֹלְסִית – לֹא קָנָה מְצוּלָה, הֶחְזִיק בַּמְּצוּלָה – לֹא קָנָה חוֹלְסִית. אִינִי?! וְהָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מָכַר לוֹ עֶשֶׂר שָׂדוֹת בְּעֶשֶׂר מְדִינוֹת, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֶחְזִיק בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן – קָנָה כּוּלָּן!

§ And Rabba says that Rav Naḥman says: If one sold another a sand field for glass making, and a pond for fishing or some other purpose, if the buyer took possession of the sand field in order to finalize the transaction, he has not acquired the pond and must therefore perform a separate act of acquisition for it. Conversely, if he took possession of the pond, he has not acquired the sand field. The Gemara asks: Is that so? But doesn’t Shmuel say: If one sold another ten fields in ten different regions, all in a single bill of sale, once he takes possession of one of them, he has acquired them all; and the two cases seem to be analogous.

הָתָם הוּא דְּסַדָּנָא דְאַרְעָא חַד הוּא, וְכוּלַּהּ חֲדָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא הוּא; אֲבָל הָכָא – הָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד, וְהָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד.

The Gemara rejects the parallel: There, in the case of the ten fields, the land is all located in one geographic block, and it all has one use, i.e., to be farmed. The buyer, therefore, acquires all of the fields when he takes possession of one of them, even if they are not adjacent. But here, in the case of the sand field and the pond, this, the sand field, has a distinct use, i.e., to supply sand for glass making, and that, the pond, has a distinct use, i.e., for fishing. Therefore, taking possession of one of them does not effect a transfer of the other.

וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי,

And some state a different version of the previous discussion.

אָמַר רַבָּה אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: הֶחְזִיק בַּחוֹלְסִית – קָנָה מְצוּלָה. פְּשִׁיטָא – דְּהָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מָכַר לוֹ עֶשֶׂר שָׂדוֹת וְכוּ׳! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: הָתָם הוּא דְּסַדָּנָא דְאַרְעָא חַד הוּא, אֲבָל הָכָא – הָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד, וְהָא תַּשְׁמִישְׁתָּא לְחוֹד; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

Rabba actually said that Rav Naḥman said: If one sold another a sand field and a pond, and the buyer took possession of the sand field, he has also acquired the pond. The Gemara asks: This is obvious, as Shmuel says: If one sold ten fields to another in ten different regions, once he takes possession of one of them, he has acquired them all. The Gemara explains why Rav Naḥman’s statement was nevertheless necessary: It is necessary lest you say that there, in the case of the ten fields, the land is all located in one geographic block with a single use, and therefore all the fields are acquired together. But here, in the case of the sand field and the pond, this, the sand field, has a distinct use, and that, the pond, has a distinct use, and therefore taking possession of one of them should not effect acquisition of the other. Therefore, Rav Naḥman teaches us that if the buyer took possession of the sand field, he has acquired the pond as well.

מַתְנִי׳ הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת הַיָּם וְאֶת הַמֶּמֶל וְאֶת הַבְּתוּלוֹת, אֲבָל לֹא מָכַר אֶת הָעֲבִירִים וְאֶת הַגַּלְגַּל וְאֶת הַקּוֹרָה. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הוּא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת הַקּוֹרָה.

MISHNA: One who sells an olive press without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the yam and the memel and the betulot, the immovable elements of the olive press. But he has not sold with it the avirim and the galgal and the kora, the movable utensils of the olive press. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the olive press, even the movable utensils. Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells an olive press has sold the kora as well, as it is the most fundamental element of the olive press.

גְּמָ׳ ״יָם״ – טְלָפְחָא. ״מֶמֶל״ – אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר מֶמֶל: מַפְרַכְתָּא. ״בְּתוּלוֹת״ – אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּלוֹנְסוֹת שֶׁל אֶרֶז, שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִין בָּהֶן אֶת הַקּוֹרָה. ״עֲבִירִים״ – כִּבְשֵׁי. ״גַּלְגַּל״ – חוּמַרְתָּא. ״קוֹרָה״ – קוֹרָה.

GEMARA: The Gemara explains the terms used in the mishna. The yam is the lentil, the round stationary container into which the olives are placed before being crushed. As for the memel, Rabbi Abba bar Memel said: This is the crusher, the utensil used to pound and crush the olives. As for the betulot, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: These are the cedar posts [klonsot] that support the beam of the olive press. The avirim are the pressers, wooden boards that are placed on top of the crushed olives, and upon which the beam is lowered in order to press the olives. The galgal is the ḥumrata, a round stone that is placed on the beam to weigh it down. The kora is the heavy wooden beam used to press down upon the olives and thereby extract the oil.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת [הַ]נְּסָרִים, וְאֶת הַיְּקָבִים, וְאֶת הַמַּפְרֵכוֹת, וְאֶת הָרֵיחַיִם הַתַּחְתּוֹנוֹת – אֲבָל לֹא הָעֶלְיוֹנָה. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הוּא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ – לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת הָעֲבִירִים, וְלֹא אֶת הַשַּׂקִּין, וְלֹא אֶת הַמַּרְצוּפִין.

The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta, 3:2): One who sells an olive press without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the boards that are fixed in place to hold the olives; and the vats for collecting the oil, and the crushers, used to pound and crush the olives before pressing them, and the lower millstone, i.e., the stationary millstone base; but not the upper millstone. But when the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that he is selling everything that is in the olive press, he has not sold the wooden boards that are placed on top of the crushed olives when they are being pressed, nor has he sold the sacks, nor has he sold the leather bags for carrying the olives, as these are all movable goods that are not specifically part of the olive press.

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית הַבַּד – מָכַר אֶת הַקּוֹרָה, שֶׁלֹּא נִקְרָא בֵּית הַבַּד אֶלָּא עַל שׁוּם קוֹרָה.

Rabbi Eliezer says: One who sells an olive press has sold the heavy wooden beam used to press down upon the olives, as it is called an olive press [beit habad] only due to this beam, the most essential part of the press, and this beam is otherwise known as a bad.

מַתְנִי׳ הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הַמֶּרְחָץ – לֹא מָכַר אֶת הַנְּסָרִין, וְאֶת הַסְּפָלִין, וְאֶת הַבֵּלָנִיּוֹת. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הִיא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָהּ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ – לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת הַמְּגוּרוֹת שֶׁל מַיִם, וְלֹא אֶת אוֹצָרוֹת שֶׁל עֵצִים.

MISHNA: One who sells a bathhouse without specifying what is included in the sale has not sold with it the boards that are placed on the floor, nor has he sold the basins or the curtains [habilaniyot]. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the bathhouse. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that he is selling everything that is in the bathhouse, he has not sold the tanks of water, nor has he sold the storerooms for wood, as an explicit sales agreement is required for these matters.

גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הַמֶּרְחָץ – מָכַר אֶת בֵּית הַנְּסָרִין, וְאֶת בֵּית הַיְּקָמִין, וְאֶת בֵּית הַסְּפָלִים, וְאֶת בֵּית הַוִּילָאוֹת; אֲבָל לֹא אֶת נְסָרִין עַצְמָן, וְלֹא יְקָמִין עַצְמָן, וְלֹא סְפָלִים עַצְמָן, וְלֹא וִילָאוֹת עַצְמָן. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ: ״הִיא וְכׇל מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכָהּ״ – הֲרֵי כּוּלָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ, לֹא מָכַר לוֹ אֶת הַבְּרֵיכוֹת הַמְסַפְּקוֹת לוֹ מַיִם – בֵּין

GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta, 3:3): One who sells a bathhouse without specifying what is included in the sale has sold with it the storeroom for the boards, and the storeroom for the implements called yekamin, and the storeroom for the basins, and the storeroom for the curtains [vilaot], but he has not sold the boards themselves, nor the yekamin themselves, nor the basins themselves, nor the curtains themselves. When the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you it and everything that is in it, all these components are sold along with the bathhouse. Both in this case, where he executes the sale without specification, and in that case, where he adds the phrase that he is selling everything that is in the bathhouse, he has not sold him the pools that supply him with water, whether

Want to follow content and continue where you left off?

Create an account today to track your progress, mark what you’ve learned, and follow the shiurim that speak to you.

Clear all items from this list?

This will remove ALL the items in this section. You will lose any progress or history connected to them. This is irreversible.

Cancel
Yes, clear all

Are you sure you want to delete this item?

You will lose any progress or history connected to this item.

Cancel
Yes, delete