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 started learning on January 5, 2020. When I complete the 7+ year cycle I will be 70 years old. I had been intimidated by those who said that I needed to study Talmud in a traditional way with a chevruta, but I decided the learning was more important to me than the method. Thankful for Daf Yomi for Women helping me catch up when I fall behind, and also being able to celebrate with each Siyum!

Pamela Elisheva
Pamela Elisheva

Bakersfield, United States

I had never heard of Daf Yomi and after reading the book, The Weight of Ink, I explored more about it. I discovered that it was only 6 months before a whole new cycle started and I was determined to give it a try. I tried to get a friend to join me on the journey but after the first few weeks they all dropped it. I haven’t missed a day of reading and of listening to the podcast.

Anne Rubin
Anne Rubin

Elkins Park, United States

My Daf journey began in August 2012 after participating in the Siyum Hashas where I was blessed as an “enabler” of others.  Galvanized into my own learning I recited the Hadran on Shas in January 2020 with Rabbanit Michelle. That Siyum was a highlight in my life.  Now, on round two, Daf has become my spiritual anchor to which I attribute manifold blessings.

Rina Goldberg
Rina Goldberg

Englewood NJ, United States

In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!

Beth Kissileff
Beth Kissileff

Pittsburgh, United States

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

After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.

Madeline Cohen
Madeline Cohen

London, United Kingdom

I started learning daf yomi at the beginning of this cycle. As the pandemic evolved, it’s been so helpful to me to have this discipline every morning to listen to the daf podcast after I’ve read the daf; learning about the relationships between the rabbis and the ways they were constructing our Jewish religion after the destruction of the Temple. I’m grateful to be on this journey!

Mona Fishbane
Mona Fishbane

Teaneck NJ, United States

I started learning Daf Yomi to fill what I saw as a large gap in my Jewish education. I also hope to inspire my three daughters to ensure that they do not allow the same Talmud-sized gap to form in their own educations. I am so proud to be a part of the Hadran community, and I have loved learning so many of the stories and halachot that we have seen so far. I look forward to continuing!
Dora Chana Haar
Dora Chana Haar

Oceanside NY, United States

After being so inspired by the siyum shas two years ago, I began tentatively learning daf yomi, like Rabbanut Michelle kept saying – taking one daf at a time. I’m still taking it one daf at a time, one masechet at a time, but I’m loving it and am still so inspired by Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran community, and yes – I am proud to be finishing Seder Mo’ed.

Caroline Graham-Ofstein
Caroline Graham-Ofstein

Bet Shemesh, Israel

It has been a pleasure keeping pace with this wonderful and scholarly group of women.

Janice Block
Janice Block

Beit Shemesh, Israel

3 years ago, I joined Rabbanit Michelle to organize the unprecedented Siyum HaShas event in Jerusalem for thousands of women. The whole experience was so inspiring that I decided then to start learning the daf and see how I would go…. and I’m still at it. I often listen to the Daf on my bike in mornings, surrounded by both the external & the internal beauty of Eretz Yisrael & Am Yisrael!

Lisa Kolodny
Lisa Kolodny

Raanana, Israel

Shortly after the death of my father, David Malik z”l, I made the commitment to Daf Yomi. While riding to Ben Gurion airport in January, Siyum HaShas was playing on the radio; that was the nudge I needed to get started. The “everyday-ness” of the Daf has been a meaningful spiritual practice, especial after COVID began & I was temporarily unable to say Kaddish at daily in-person minyanim.

Lisa S. Malik
Lisa S. Malik

Wynnewood, United States

About a year into learning more about Judaism on a path to potential conversion, I saw an article about the upcoming Siyum HaShas in January of 2020. My curiosity was piqued and I immediately started investigating what learning the Daf actually meant. Daily learning? Just what I wanted. Seven and a half years? I love a challenge! So I dove in head first and I’ve enjoyed every moment!!
Nickie Matthews
Nickie Matthews

Blacksburg, United States

I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.

Jenifer Nech
Jenifer Nech

Houston, 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

In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!

Beth Kissileff
Beth Kissileff

Pittsburgh, United States

Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.

Rebecca Stulberg
Rebecca Stulberg

Ottawa, Canada

I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.

Beth Elster
Beth Elster

Irvine, United States

I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.

Gitta Jaroslawicz-Neufeld
Gitta Jaroslawicz-Neufeld

Far Rockaway, United States

I started learning Talmud with R’ Haramati in Yeshivah of Flatbush. But after a respite of 60 years, Rabbanit Michelle lit my fire – after attending the last three world siyumim in Miami Beach, Meadowlands and Boca Raton, and now that I’m retired, I decided – “I can do this!” It has been an incredible journey so far, and I look forward to learning Daf everyday – Mazal Tov to everyone!

Roslyn Jaffe
Roslyn Jaffe

Florida, 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