Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

January 9, 2017 | 讬状讗 讘讟讘转 转砖注状讝

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Bava Metzia 105

Rava raises issues regarding a heiter iska that allows one to invest money for someone else in a way that they can share the profits. 聽Based on the way it is set up, that a loss will be split 50/50 but gains 2/3 to the borrower (the one investing the money) and 1/3 to the investor, if one takes an investment and splits it into 2 documents, there can be a loss for the investor if one yields profit sand the other a loss. 聽And if 2 deals are put into one document, it can cause a loss for the borrower. 聽Various other investment issues are discussed. 聽If a sharecropper who pays a fixed amount to the owner decides not to weed the field, this is not allowed for various reasons cited in the mishna and gemara. 聽If one sharecrops for percentages and there is very little yield, he is not responsible. 聽The mishna and gemara discuss what the amount is. 聽From here the gemara digresses to various halachot regarding measurements in other areas of halacha including ritual impurity.


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

转专讬 注讬住拽讬 讜讞讚 砖讟专讗 驻住讬讚讗 讚诇讜讛

Conversely, if two people engaged in two joint ventures and recorded both in one document, this will be to the detriment of the borrower. They calculate the profits and losses of the two transactions together, and therefore as long as the profits of one joint venture are greater than the losses of the other, the investor will not have to suffer a loss.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚拽讘讬诇 注讬住拽讗 诪谉 讞讘专讬讛 讜驻住讬讚 讟专讞 讜诪诇讬讬讛 讜诇讗 讗讜讚注讬讛 诇讗 诪爪讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚专讬 诪讛讬讗讱 驻住讬讚讗 讘讛讚讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讛讻讬 讟专讞转 诇诪诇讬讜转讬讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬拽专讜 诇讱 诪驻住讬讚 注讬住拽讬

And Rava says: This one, who receives merchandise for a joint venture from another, and lost money in the process, and then made the effort to replace the loss but did not inform the investor that he had done so, he may not later say to the investor: Bear this original loss together with me. This is because the investor can say to him: It is for this reason that you made the effort to replace the loss, so that you should not be called a loser of ventures. You wanted to preserve your reputation in order to improve your future business prospects but did not intend to be reimbursed.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛谞讬 讘讬 转专讬 讚注讘讚讬 注讬住拽讗 讘讛讚讬 讛讚讚讬 讜专讜讜讞 讜讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讚 诇讞讘专讬讛 转讗 诇讬驻诇讜讙 讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬讚讱 谞专讜讜讞 讟驻讬 讚讬谞讗 讛讜讗 讚诪注讻讘 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讘 诇讬 驻诇讙讗 讚专讜讜讞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讜讜讞讗 诇拽专谞讗 诪砖转注讘讚

And Rava said: With regard to these two managers who engaged in a joint venture together, i.e., they both received merchandise together from an investor, and profited from it, and one of them said to the other: Come, let us divide the profits and terminate the venture, the halakha is as follows: If the other said to him: Let us wait and profit more, the halakha is that the second manager indeed prevents the first from executing his request. And if, instead of requesting the final division of the profits and the termination of the venture, one said to the other: At least give me half the profits, the latter can say to him: The profit is liened to the principal, meaning that the profits and the principal are considered a single unit, and we can earn much more if we do not set aside the profits.

讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讘 诇讬 驻诇讙讗 专讜讜讞讗 讜驻诇讙讗 拽专谞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注讬住拽讗 诇讛讚讚讬 诪砖讜注讘讚 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 谞驻诇讜讙 专讜讜讞讗 讜谞驻诇讜讙 拽专谞讗 讜讗讬 诪讟讬 诇讱 驻住讬讚讗 讚专讬谞讗 讘讛讚讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 诪讝诇讗 讚讘讬 转专讬 注讚讬祝

Rava continues: And if one says to the other: Give me half the profits and half the principal, the latter can say to him: The merchandise for the joint venture is liened to both of us. As we are equal partners in this venture, you cannot force me to divide it. And if one says to the other: Let us divide the profits and divide the principal, and if you suffer a loss as a result, I will bear the loss with you, his partner can say to him: No, I do not desire to do that, since the luck of two people is better. Consequently, I want to continue working together. In all these cases, the claims of the second manager are accepted.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇谞讻砖 讜讗诪专 诇讜 诪讛 讗讬讻驻转 诇讱 讛讜讗讬诇 讜讗谞讬 谞讜转谉 诇讱 讗转 讞讻讬专讱 讗讬谉 砖讜诪注讬谉 诇讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讻讜诇 诇讜诪专 诇讜 诇诪讞专 讗转讛 讬讜爪讗 诪诪谞讛 讜诪注诇转 诇驻谞讬 注砖讘讬诐

MISHNA: With regard to one who received a field from another to cultivate and did not want to weed it, and he then said to the owner: What do you care if I neglect the land? You will not suffer a loss since I will give you the amount of produce I owe you for your granting me tenancy, regardless of the state of the field. Nevertheless, they do not listen to him. The reason is because the owner of the land can say to him: Tomorrow you will depart from the field, and it will grow weeds for me, which will remain there and disrupt the yield of the field for years to come.

讙诪壮 讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讘转专 讛讻讬 讻专讬讘谞讗 诇讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讟讬 诪注诇讬讬转讗 讘注讬谞讗 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讝讘讬谞谞讗 诇讱 讞讟讬 诪砖讜拽讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讟讬 讚讗专注讗讬 讘注讬谞讗 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪谞讻讬砖谞讗 诇讱 砖讬注讜专 诪谞转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽讗 诪谞住讘转 砖诐 专注 诇讗专注讗讬

GEMARA: If the cultivator said to the owner: Afterward, when I have reaped the field, I will plow it and remove the weeds, the owner can say to him: I want superior wheat, not wheat that sprouted among weeds. And if he says to the owner: I will buy good wheat for you from the market, the owner can say to him: I want wheat from my land. And if he says to the owner: I will weed for you according to the measure of your portion, but no more, the owner can say to him: You are giving a bad name to my land, as everyone will see that it is full of weeds.

讜讛转谞谉 诪驻谞讬 砖诪注诇转 诇驻谞讬 注砖讘讬诐 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讝专讗 讚谞驻诇 谞驻诇

The Gemara asks: But didn鈥檛 we learn in the mishna that the reason they do not listen to him is: Because it will grow weeds for me, indicating that these other claims are not accepted? Rather, the explanation must be because the owner can say to him: The seed that fell has fallen. In other words, even if the cultivator later plows the land and uproots all of the weeds, their seeds remain in the ground and will sprout in the following years.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜诇讗 注砖转讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 讻讚讬 诇讛注诪讬讚 讻专讬 讞讬讬讘 诇讟驻诇 讘讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讗讬 拽爪讘讛 讘讻专讬 讗诇讗 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛

MISHNA: With regard to one who receives a field from another to cultivate and it did not produce a sufficient crop to cover the expenses of its upkeep, if it has enough produce to form a pile he is obligated to take care of it and give the owner his share. Rabbi Yehuda says: What fixed measure is a pile? There is no inherent measure of produce that is considered significant, as it all depends on the size of the plot of land in question. Rather, the relevant issue is whether it has a crop equivalent to the measure of seeds for dropping in a field in order to sow it.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜诇讗 注砖转讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 讻讚讬 诇讛注诪讬讚 讻专讬 讞讬讬讘 诇讟驻诇 讘讛 砖讻讱 讻讜转讘 诇讜 讗谞讗 讗讜拽讬诐 讜讗谞讬专 讜讗讝专注 讜讗讞爪讜讚 讜讗注诪专 讜讗讚讜砖 讜讗讬讚专讬 讜讗讜拽讬诐 讻专讬讗 拽讚诪讱 讜转讬转讬 讗谞转 讜转讬讟讜诇 驻诇讙讗 讜讗谞讗 讘注诪诇讬 讜讘谞驻拽讜转 讬讚讬 驻诇讙讗

GEMARA: The Sages taught: With regard to one who receives a field from another to cultivate and it did not produce a sufficient crop, if it has enough produce to form a pile he is obligated to take care of it and provide the owner with his share. This is because this is what he writes to him in the cultivator鈥檚 contract: I will stand and plow and plant and reap and bind and thresh and winnow and establish a pile before you, and you will come and take half, and I, for my work and expenses, will take the other half. Based on this contract, if there is sufficient produce to form a pile, the cultivator must fulfill the terms of the agreement.

讜讻诪讛 讻讚讬 诇讛注诪讬讚 讘讛 讻专讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讻讚讬 砖转注诪讜讚 讘讜 讛专讞转 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 专讞转 讛讬讜爪讗 诪讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 诇讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 诪讗讬

The Gemara asks: And how much is the amount of: Enough to form a pile? How large must the pile be? Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina, said: Enough for the winnowing shovel to stand in it. If the pile is big enough that the shovel can be placed there and stand independently without falling, it is considered a sufficiently large pile. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to a winnowing shovel that protrudes from this side to that side, i.e., whose edges extend beyond the pile, what is the halakha? Is this considered a pile in which a winnowing shovel can stand or not?

转讗 砖诪注 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 诇讚讬讚讬 诪驻专砖讗 诇讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讻诇 砖讗讬谉 讻讜谞住 砖诇讜 专讜讗讛 驻谞讬 讛讞诪讛 讗讬转诪专 诇讜讬 讗诪专 砖诇砖 住讗讬谉 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗诪专讬 住讗转讬诐 讗诪专 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 住讗转讬诐 砖讗诪专讜 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛讛讜爪讗讛

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from that which Rabbi Abbahu said: This was explained to me by Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina: Any pile in which the blade of the winnowing shovel cannot see the face of the sun because it is covered by the pile is considered a significant one. It was stated that the amora鈥檌m engaged in a dispute concerning this issue: Levi says: This pile must be three se鈥檃 in size, while the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: Two se鈥檃. Reish Lakish says: The two se鈥檃 of which they spoke is without deducting the expenses. Consequently, if he has paid the expenses and a profit of two se鈥檃 remains, in that case alone it is considered worthwhile to work the field. But if it cannot produce this amount, the cultivator may neglect the land if he so chooses.

转谞谉 讛转诐 驻专讬爪讬 讝讬转讬诐 讜注谞讘讬诐 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诪讟诪讗讬谉 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪讟讛专讬谉

The Gemara cites a dispute from a different area of halakha that discusses a similar measurement: We learned in a mishna there (Okatzin 3:6) concerning the halakhot of food impurities: With regard to unruly olives and grapes, Beit Shammai hold that they become susceptible to ritual impurity, as they are considered food, and Beit Hillel hold that they do not become susceptible to ritual impurity because they are of inferior quality and are unfit for consumption.

诪讗讬 驻专讬爪讬 讝讬转讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 专砖注讬 讝讬转讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讜诪讗讬 拽专讗讛 [讜讘谞讬] 驻专讬爪讬 注诪讱 讬谞砖讗讜 诇讛注诪讬讚 讞讝讜谉 讜谞讻砖诇讜 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 讗诪专 诪讛讻讗 讜讛讜诇讬讚 讘谉 驻专讬抓 砖驻讱 讚诐

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of unruly [peritzei] olives? Rav Huna said: Wicked olives, i.e., olives that barely produce any oil. Rav Yosef said: And what is the verse from which it is derived? 鈥淎lso the children of the wicked [peritzei] among your people shall raise themselves up to establish the vision but they shall stumble鈥 (Daniel 11:14). This verse indicates that the word peritzei means wicked. Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said that the meaning of this word can be derived from here: 鈥淚f he beget a son that is a robber [paritz], a shedder of blood鈥 (Ezekiel 18:10).

讜讻诪讛 驻专讬爪讬 讝讬转讬诐 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉 诇拽讜专讛 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗诪专讬 住讗转讬诐 诇拽讜专讛

The Gemara asks: And how much is the amount of unruly olives? When are olives classified as unruly? Rabbi Elazar says: They are classified as such if it is possible to extract only four kav of oil from one press of the beam when the fruits are brought in together to the olive press. The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: They are classified as such if it is possible to extract only two se鈥檃 of oil from one press of the beam.

讜诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讛讗 讘讗转专讗 讚诪注讬讬诇讬 讻讜专讗 讘讗讜诇诇讗 讛讗 讘讗转专讗 讚诪注讬讬诇讬 转诇转讗 讻讜专讬谉 讘讗讜诇诇讗

The Gemara comments: And these Sages do not disagree with regard to the halakha itself, as the difference between their rulings stems from divergent local practices. This statement of Rabbi Elazar is referring to a place where one kor is brought into the press, from which he must be able to extract four kav, whereas that halakha of the school of Rabbi Yannai is referring to a place where three kor are brought into the baskets of the oil press. Since they bring in three times the amount of fruit, it must produce exactly three times as much oil.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉

The Sages taught:

注诇讜 讘讗讬诇谉 砖讻讜讞讜 专注 讜讘住讜讻讛 砖讻讜讞讛 专注 讟诪讗

If a zav and a ritually pure person climbed a tree that has little strength, which shook as they climbed it, or if they climbed onto a branch that has little strength, the ritually pure person is rendered ritually impure. One of the ways a zav imparts impurity is by movement, and here the zav is viewed as having moved the pure person.

讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇谉 砖讻讜讞讜 专注 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讻诇 砖讗讬谉 讘注讬拽专讜 诇讞讜拽 专讜讘注 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 住讜讻讛 砖讻讜讞讛 专注 讗诪专 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讻诇 砖谞讞讘讗转 讘讞讝讬讜谞讛

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this tree that has little strength, i.e., how is a tree with little strength defined? The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: It is any tree whose trunk is not broad enough that one can hollow out a vessel of a quarterkav from it. What are the circumstances of a branch that has little strength? Reish Lakish said: It is any branch concerning which its circumference can be hidden, i.e., inserted, in a person鈥檚 fist. A branch of this size is generally not strong enough to hold two people without shaking.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讛诪讛诇讱 讘讘讬转 讛驻专住 注诇 讙讘讬 讗讘谞讬诐 砖讬讻讜诇 诇讛住讬讟 注诇 讛讗讚诐 讜注诇 讛讘讛诪讛 砖讻讜讞谉 专注 讟诪讗

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Oholot 18:6): With regard to one who walks in an area in which uncertainty exists concerning the location of a grave or corpse [beit haperas], if he treads over stones that he can move as he walks, raising concerns that he might have moved a bone of a corpse and thereby rendered himself impure, or if he was in that location, on the back of a person or riding on an animal that had little strength, he is impure, as he is considered to have moved the impurity himself.

讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讚诐 砖讻讜讞讜 专注 讗诪专 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讻诇 砖专讜讻讘讜 讜讗专讻讘讜转讬讜 谞讜拽砖讜转 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讘讛诪讛 砖讻讜讞讛 专注 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讻诇 砖专讜讻讘讛 诪讟讬诇讛 讙诇诇讬诐

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of a person that has little strength? Reish Lakish said: Any person whose knees knock against each other when someone rides upon him. What are the circumstances of an animal that has little strength? The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: Any animal that releases excrement due to strain when a person rides upon it.

讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 诇转驻诇讛 讜诇转驻讬诇讬谉 讗专讘注讛 拽讘讬谉

搂 As the Gemara has cited the rulings of the school of Rabbi Yannai with regard to measurements, it now cites similar halakhot that the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai state: With regard to prayer and with regard to phylacteries, the measure is four kav.

诇转驻诇讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛谞讜砖讗 诪砖讗讜讬 注诇 讻转讬驻讜 讜讛讙讬注 讝诪谉 转驻诇讛 驻讞讜转 诪讗专讘注讛 拽讘讬谉 诪驻砖讬诇讬谉 诇讗讞讜专讬讜 讜诪转驻诇诇 讗专讘注讛 拽讘讬谉 诪谞讬讞 注诇 讙讘讬 拽专拽注 讜诪转驻诇诇

The Gemara inquires: What is the relevance of this measure with regard to prayer? This is as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to one who carries a load on his shoulder and the time for prayer arrives, if the load is less than four kav, he lowers it behind him while still holding it and prays, as a light load of this size does not interfere with prayer. If the load is four kav, he places it on the ground and prays.

诇转驻讬诇讬谉 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 谞讜砖讗 诪砖讗讜讬 注诇 专讗砖讜 讜转驻讬诇讬谉 讘专讗砖讜 讗诐 讛讬讜 转驻讬诇讬谉 专讜爪爪讜转 讗住讜专 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 诪讜转专 讘讗讬讝讜 诪砖讗讜讬 讗诪专讜 讘诪砖讗讜讬 砖诇 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉

What is the relevance of this amount with regard to phylacteries? This is as it is taught in a baraita: If a man was carrying a load on his head and he had phylacteries on his head, if the phylacteries were being crushed under the load it is forbidden to leave them on his head, but if they were not being crushed, it is permitted. With regard to which load did the Sages state this halakha? They stated it with regard to a load of four kav.

转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讛诪讜爪讬讗 讝讘诇 注诇 专讗砖讜 讜转驻讬诇讬谉 讘专讗砖讜 讛专讬 讝讛 诇讗 讬住诇拽诐 诇爪讚讚讬谉 讜诇讗 讬拽砖专诐 讘诪转谞讬讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 谞讜讛讙 讘讛谉 诪谞讛讙 讘讝讬讜谉 讗讘诇 拽讜砖专诐 注诇 讝专讜注讜 讘诪拽讜诐 转驻讬诇讬谉

Rabbi 岣yya teaches: With regard to one who removes garbage by carrying it on his head and has phylacteries on his head, he may not move the phylacteries to the side to prevent them from being crushed, and likewise he may not tie the phylacteries of the head to his loins because he thereby treats them in a manner of degradation. But he may tie them on his arm in the location where the phylacteries of the hand are placed.

诪砖讜诐 讚讘讬 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗驻讬诇讜 诪讟驻讞转 砖诇讛谉 讗住讜专 诇讛谞讬讞 注诇 讛专讗砖 砖讬砖 讘讜 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜讻诪讛 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讗驻讬诇讜 专讘注讗 讚专讘注讗 讚驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗

The Sages said in the name of the school of Sheila: It is forbidden to place on the head of one that has phylacteries on it even the scarf in which they are wrapped. The Gemara asks: And how much does Rabbi Sheila permit one to place on his head while wearing phylacteries? Abaye said: Even as little as one-quarter of one-quarter of the smallest measurement of Pumbedita is still forbidden from being placed on one鈥檚 head.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讗讬 拽爪讘讛 讘讻专讬 讗诇讗 讗诐 讬砖 讘讜 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛 讜讻诪讛 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗专讘注讛 住讗讬谉 诇讻讜专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讚讬诇讬讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜谞转 住讗讬谉 诇讻讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 住讘讗 诇专讘 讞诪讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 讗住讘专讛 诇讱 讘砖谞讬 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛讜讛 砖诪讬谞讗 讗专注讗 讘砖谞讬 讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 讛讜讛 讻讞讬砖讗 讗专注讗

搂 The mishna teaches: Rabbi Yehuda says: What fixed measure is a pile? Rather, the relevant issue is whether it has a crop equivalent to the measure of seeds for dropping in a field in order to sow it. The Gemara asks: And how much is聽equivalent聽to聽the measure of seeds for dropping in a field in order to sow it? Rabbi Ami says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: Four se鈥檃 for the amount of land sufficient to grow a kor. Rabbi Ami himself, though, says eight se鈥檃 for the amount of land sufficient to grow a kor. A certain elder said to Rav 岣ma, son of Rabba bar Avuh: I will explain it to you: In the years of Rabbi Yo岣nan the land was fat, while in the years of Rabbi Ami the land was lean, and it was therefore necessary to double the amount of seed for each unit of land.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讛专讜讞 砖驻讬讝专讛 讗转 讛注讜诪专讬谉 讗讜诪讚讬诐 讗讜转讛 讻诪讛 诇拽讟 专讗讜讬讛 诇注砖讜转 讜谞讜转谉 诇注谞讬讬诐 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 谞讜转谉 诇注谞讬讬诐 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Pe鈥檃 5:1): If the wind scattered the standing sheaves so that it is no longer known which gleanings fell from the sheaves during the harvest and belong to the poor, one evaluates how many gleanings it was fit to produce, and he gives these to the poor. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He gives to the poor the amount聽equivalent to聽the measure of seeds dropping聽in the course of harvesting.

讜讻诪讛 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讚讬诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉 诇讻讜专 讘注讬 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诇讻讜专 讝专注 讗讜 诇讻讜专 转讘讜讗讛 诇诪驻讜诇转 讬讚 讗讜 诇诪驻讜诇转 砖讜讜专讬诐

The Gemara asks: And how much is the amount equivalent to the measure of seeds dropping聽in the course of harvesting? When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael he said that Rabbi Elazar said, and some say it was Rabbi Yo岣nan: Four kav for a kor. Rabbi Yirmeya raised a dilemma: Does this mean for a field that requires a kor of seed to plant it, or for a kor of produce? And if it is the former, does it refer to sowing by hand or to sowing by oxen?

转讗 砖诪注 讚讻讬 讗转讬 专讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讜讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉 诇讻讜专 讝专注 讜注讚讬讬谉 转讘注讬 诇讱 诇诪驻讜诇转 讬讚 讗讜 诇诪驻讜诇转 砖讜讜专讬诐 转讬拽讜

The Gemara answers: Come and hear, as when Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael he said that Rabbi Avuh said that Rabbi Elazar said, and some say that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Four kav for a field sown with a kor of seed. The Gemara comments: And the other question should still raise a dilemma for you: Does this refer to sowing by hand or to sowing by oxen? No answer was found for this question, and the dilemma shall stand unresolved.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜讗讻诇讛 讞讙讘 讗讜 谞砖讚驻讛 讗诐 诪讻转 诪讚讬谞讛 讛讬讗 诪谞讻讛 诇讜 诪谉 讞讻讜专讜 讗诐 讗讬谞讛 诪讻转 诪讚讬谞讛 讗讬谉 诪谞讻讛 诇讜 诪谉 讞讻讜专讜 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 拽讬讘诇讛 讛讬诪谞讜 讘诪注讜转 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 讗讬谞讜 诪谞讻讛 诇讜 诪讞讻讜专讜

MISHNA: In the case of one who receives a field from another to cultivate and grasshoppers consumed it or it was wind blasted, if it is a regional disaster which affected all the fields in the area, the cultivator subtracts from the produce he owes as part of his tenancy. If it is not a regional disaster, the cultivator does not subtract from the produce he owes as part of his tenancy. Rabbi Yehuda says: If the cultivator received it from the owner for a fixed sum of money, whether this way, i.e., there is a regional disaster, or whether that way, i.e., there was no regional disaster, he does not subtract the produce he owes as part of his tenancy.

讙诪壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 诪讻转 诪讚讬谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讻讙讜谉 讚讗讬砖讚讜祝 专讜讘讗 讚讘讗讙讗 注讜诇讗 讗诪专 讻讙讜谉 砖谞砖转讚驻讜 讗专讘注 砖讚讜转 诪讗专讘注 专讜讞讜转讬讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of a regional disaster? Rav Yehuda said: If, for example, most of that valley in which the field was located was wind blasted, it is considered a regional disaster. Ulla said: If, for example, four fields were wind blasted on its four sides, it is considered a regional disaster.

讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讘注讜 讘诪注专讘讗 谞砖讚祝 转诇诐 讗讞讚 注诇 驻谞讬 讻讜诇讛 诪讗讬 谞砖转讬讬专 转诇诐 讗讞讚 注诇 驻谞讬 讻讜诇讛 诪讛讜 讗驻住讬拽讗 讘讬专讗 诪讗讬 讗住驻住转讗

Ulla also said: They raise the following dilemma in the West, Eretz Yisrael: If one furrow was wind blasted along its entire length, adjacent to other fields that were wind blasted, what is the halakha? Is this considered to be part of the regional disaster? Conversely, if one furrow remained undamaged along its entire length, what is the halakha? Does the remaining furrow mean that the entire field is not considered to be part of the regional disaster? If a fallow field divided between the cultivated fields and the fields that were wind blasted, what is the halakha? Alternatively, if there was a field of fodder between this field and the others that were wind blasted,

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Bava Metzia 105

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Bava Metzia 105

转专讬 注讬住拽讬 讜讞讚 砖讟专讗 驻住讬讚讗 讚诇讜讛

Conversely, if two people engaged in two joint ventures and recorded both in one document, this will be to the detriment of the borrower. They calculate the profits and losses of the two transactions together, and therefore as long as the profits of one joint venture are greater than the losses of the other, the investor will not have to suffer a loss.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚拽讘讬诇 注讬住拽讗 诪谉 讞讘专讬讛 讜驻住讬讚 讟专讞 讜诪诇讬讬讛 讜诇讗 讗讜讚注讬讛 诇讗 诪爪讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚专讬 诪讛讬讗讱 驻住讬讚讗 讘讛讚讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讛讻讬 讟专讞转 诇诪诇讬讜转讬讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬拽专讜 诇讱 诪驻住讬讚 注讬住拽讬

And Rava says: This one, who receives merchandise for a joint venture from another, and lost money in the process, and then made the effort to replace the loss but did not inform the investor that he had done so, he may not later say to the investor: Bear this original loss together with me. This is because the investor can say to him: It is for this reason that you made the effort to replace the loss, so that you should not be called a loser of ventures. You wanted to preserve your reputation in order to improve your future business prospects but did not intend to be reimbursed.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛谞讬 讘讬 转专讬 讚注讘讚讬 注讬住拽讗 讘讛讚讬 讛讚讚讬 讜专讜讜讞 讜讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讚 诇讞讘专讬讛 转讗 诇讬驻诇讜讙 讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬讚讱 谞专讜讜讞 讟驻讬 讚讬谞讗 讛讜讗 讚诪注讻讘 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讘 诇讬 驻诇讙讗 讚专讜讜讞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讜讜讞讗 诇拽专谞讗 诪砖转注讘讚

And Rava said: With regard to these two managers who engaged in a joint venture together, i.e., they both received merchandise together from an investor, and profited from it, and one of them said to the other: Come, let us divide the profits and terminate the venture, the halakha is as follows: If the other said to him: Let us wait and profit more, the halakha is that the second manager indeed prevents the first from executing his request. And if, instead of requesting the final division of the profits and the termination of the venture, one said to the other: At least give me half the profits, the latter can say to him: The profit is liened to the principal, meaning that the profits and the principal are considered a single unit, and we can earn much more if we do not set aside the profits.

讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讘 诇讬 驻诇讙讗 专讜讜讞讗 讜驻诇讙讗 拽专谞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注讬住拽讗 诇讛讚讚讬 诪砖讜注讘讚 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 谞驻诇讜讙 专讜讜讞讗 讜谞驻诇讜讙 拽专谞讗 讜讗讬 诪讟讬 诇讱 驻住讬讚讗 讚专讬谞讗 讘讛讚讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 诪讝诇讗 讚讘讬 转专讬 注讚讬祝

Rava continues: And if one says to the other: Give me half the profits and half the principal, the latter can say to him: The merchandise for the joint venture is liened to both of us. As we are equal partners in this venture, you cannot force me to divide it. And if one says to the other: Let us divide the profits and divide the principal, and if you suffer a loss as a result, I will bear the loss with you, his partner can say to him: No, I do not desire to do that, since the luck of two people is better. Consequently, I want to continue working together. In all these cases, the claims of the second manager are accepted.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇谞讻砖 讜讗诪专 诇讜 诪讛 讗讬讻驻转 诇讱 讛讜讗讬诇 讜讗谞讬 谞讜转谉 诇讱 讗转 讞讻讬专讱 讗讬谉 砖讜诪注讬谉 诇讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讬讻讜诇 诇讜诪专 诇讜 诇诪讞专 讗转讛 讬讜爪讗 诪诪谞讛 讜诪注诇转 诇驻谞讬 注砖讘讬诐

MISHNA: With regard to one who received a field from another to cultivate and did not want to weed it, and he then said to the owner: What do you care if I neglect the land? You will not suffer a loss since I will give you the amount of produce I owe you for your granting me tenancy, regardless of the state of the field. Nevertheless, they do not listen to him. The reason is because the owner of the land can say to him: Tomorrow you will depart from the field, and it will grow weeds for me, which will remain there and disrupt the yield of the field for years to come.

讙诪壮 讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讘转专 讛讻讬 讻专讬讘谞讗 诇讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讟讬 诪注诇讬讬转讗 讘注讬谞讗 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讝讘讬谞谞讗 诇讱 讞讟讬 诪砖讜拽讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讞讟讬 讚讗专注讗讬 讘注讬谞讗 讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪谞讻讬砖谞讗 诇讱 砖讬注讜专 诪谞转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽讗 诪谞住讘转 砖诐 专注 诇讗专注讗讬

GEMARA: If the cultivator said to the owner: Afterward, when I have reaped the field, I will plow it and remove the weeds, the owner can say to him: I want superior wheat, not wheat that sprouted among weeds. And if he says to the owner: I will buy good wheat for you from the market, the owner can say to him: I want wheat from my land. And if he says to the owner: I will weed for you according to the measure of your portion, but no more, the owner can say to him: You are giving a bad name to my land, as everyone will see that it is full of weeds.

讜讛转谞谉 诪驻谞讬 砖诪注诇转 诇驻谞讬 注砖讘讬诐 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讝专讗 讚谞驻诇 谞驻诇

The Gemara asks: But didn鈥檛 we learn in the mishna that the reason they do not listen to him is: Because it will grow weeds for me, indicating that these other claims are not accepted? Rather, the explanation must be because the owner can say to him: The seed that fell has fallen. In other words, even if the cultivator later plows the land and uproots all of the weeds, their seeds remain in the ground and will sprout in the following years.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜诇讗 注砖转讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 讻讚讬 诇讛注诪讬讚 讻专讬 讞讬讬讘 诇讟驻诇 讘讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讗讬 拽爪讘讛 讘讻专讬 讗诇讗 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛

MISHNA: With regard to one who receives a field from another to cultivate and it did not produce a sufficient crop to cover the expenses of its upkeep, if it has enough produce to form a pile he is obligated to take care of it and give the owner his share. Rabbi Yehuda says: What fixed measure is a pile? There is no inherent measure of produce that is considered significant, as it all depends on the size of the plot of land in question. Rather, the relevant issue is whether it has a crop equivalent to the measure of seeds for dropping in a field in order to sow it.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜诇讗 注砖转讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 讻讚讬 诇讛注诪讬讚 讻专讬 讞讬讬讘 诇讟驻诇 讘讛 砖讻讱 讻讜转讘 诇讜 讗谞讗 讗讜拽讬诐 讜讗谞讬专 讜讗讝专注 讜讗讞爪讜讚 讜讗注诪专 讜讗讚讜砖 讜讗讬讚专讬 讜讗讜拽讬诐 讻专讬讗 拽讚诪讱 讜转讬转讬 讗谞转 讜转讬讟讜诇 驻诇讙讗 讜讗谞讗 讘注诪诇讬 讜讘谞驻拽讜转 讬讚讬 驻诇讙讗

GEMARA: The Sages taught: With regard to one who receives a field from another to cultivate and it did not produce a sufficient crop, if it has enough produce to form a pile he is obligated to take care of it and provide the owner with his share. This is because this is what he writes to him in the cultivator鈥檚 contract: I will stand and plow and plant and reap and bind and thresh and winnow and establish a pile before you, and you will come and take half, and I, for my work and expenses, will take the other half. Based on this contract, if there is sufficient produce to form a pile, the cultivator must fulfill the terms of the agreement.

讜讻诪讛 讻讚讬 诇讛注诪讬讚 讘讛 讻专讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讻讚讬 砖转注诪讜讚 讘讜 讛专讞转 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 专讞转 讛讬讜爪讗 诪讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 诇讛讗讬 讙讬住讗 诪讗讬

The Gemara asks: And how much is the amount of: Enough to form a pile? How large must the pile be? Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina, said: Enough for the winnowing shovel to stand in it. If the pile is big enough that the shovel can be placed there and stand independently without falling, it is considered a sufficiently large pile. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to a winnowing shovel that protrudes from this side to that side, i.e., whose edges extend beyond the pile, what is the halakha? Is this considered a pile in which a winnowing shovel can stand or not?

转讗 砖诪注 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 诇讚讬讚讬 诪驻专砖讗 诇讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讻诇 砖讗讬谉 讻讜谞住 砖诇讜 专讜讗讛 驻谞讬 讛讞诪讛 讗讬转诪专 诇讜讬 讗诪专 砖诇砖 住讗讬谉 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗诪专讬 住讗转讬诐 讗诪专 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 住讗转讬诐 砖讗诪专讜 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛讛讜爪讗讛

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from that which Rabbi Abbahu said: This was explained to me by Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina: Any pile in which the blade of the winnowing shovel cannot see the face of the sun because it is covered by the pile is considered a significant one. It was stated that the amora鈥檌m engaged in a dispute concerning this issue: Levi says: This pile must be three se鈥檃 in size, while the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: Two se鈥檃. Reish Lakish says: The two se鈥檃 of which they spoke is without deducting the expenses. Consequently, if he has paid the expenses and a profit of two se鈥檃 remains, in that case alone it is considered worthwhile to work the field. But if it cannot produce this amount, the cultivator may neglect the land if he so chooses.

转谞谉 讛转诐 驻专讬爪讬 讝讬转讬诐 讜注谞讘讬诐 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 诪讟诪讗讬谉 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪讟讛专讬谉

The Gemara cites a dispute from a different area of halakha that discusses a similar measurement: We learned in a mishna there (Okatzin 3:6) concerning the halakhot of food impurities: With regard to unruly olives and grapes, Beit Shammai hold that they become susceptible to ritual impurity, as they are considered food, and Beit Hillel hold that they do not become susceptible to ritual impurity because they are of inferior quality and are unfit for consumption.

诪讗讬 驻专讬爪讬 讝讬转讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 专砖注讬 讝讬转讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讜诪讗讬 拽专讗讛 [讜讘谞讬] 驻专讬爪讬 注诪讱 讬谞砖讗讜 诇讛注诪讬讚 讞讝讜谉 讜谞讻砖诇讜 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 讗诪专 诪讛讻讗 讜讛讜诇讬讚 讘谉 驻专讬抓 砖驻讱 讚诐

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of unruly [peritzei] olives? Rav Huna said: Wicked olives, i.e., olives that barely produce any oil. Rav Yosef said: And what is the verse from which it is derived? 鈥淎lso the children of the wicked [peritzei] among your people shall raise themselves up to establish the vision but they shall stumble鈥 (Daniel 11:14). This verse indicates that the word peritzei means wicked. Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said that the meaning of this word can be derived from here: 鈥淚f he beget a son that is a robber [paritz], a shedder of blood鈥 (Ezekiel 18:10).

讜讻诪讛 驻专讬爪讬 讝讬转讬诐 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉 诇拽讜专讛 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗诪专讬 住讗转讬诐 诇拽讜专讛

The Gemara asks: And how much is the amount of unruly olives? When are olives classified as unruly? Rabbi Elazar says: They are classified as such if it is possible to extract only four kav of oil from one press of the beam when the fruits are brought in together to the olive press. The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: They are classified as such if it is possible to extract only two se鈥檃 of oil from one press of the beam.

讜诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讛讗 讘讗转专讗 讚诪注讬讬诇讬 讻讜专讗 讘讗讜诇诇讗 讛讗 讘讗转专讗 讚诪注讬讬诇讬 转诇转讗 讻讜专讬谉 讘讗讜诇诇讗

The Gemara comments: And these Sages do not disagree with regard to the halakha itself, as the difference between their rulings stems from divergent local practices. This statement of Rabbi Elazar is referring to a place where one kor is brought into the press, from which he must be able to extract four kav, whereas that halakha of the school of Rabbi Yannai is referring to a place where three kor are brought into the baskets of the oil press. Since they bring in three times the amount of fruit, it must produce exactly three times as much oil.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉

The Sages taught:

注诇讜 讘讗讬诇谉 砖讻讜讞讜 专注 讜讘住讜讻讛 砖讻讜讞讛 专注 讟诪讗

If a zav and a ritually pure person climbed a tree that has little strength, which shook as they climbed it, or if they climbed onto a branch that has little strength, the ritually pure person is rendered ritually impure. One of the ways a zav imparts impurity is by movement, and here the zav is viewed as having moved the pure person.

讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇谉 砖讻讜讞讜 专注 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讻诇 砖讗讬谉 讘注讬拽专讜 诇讞讜拽 专讜讘注 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 住讜讻讛 砖讻讜讞讛 专注 讗诪专 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讻诇 砖谞讞讘讗转 讘讞讝讬讜谞讛

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this tree that has little strength, i.e., how is a tree with little strength defined? The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: It is any tree whose trunk is not broad enough that one can hollow out a vessel of a quarterkav from it. What are the circumstances of a branch that has little strength? Reish Lakish said: It is any branch concerning which its circumference can be hidden, i.e., inserted, in a person鈥檚 fist. A branch of this size is generally not strong enough to hold two people without shaking.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讛诪讛诇讱 讘讘讬转 讛驻专住 注诇 讙讘讬 讗讘谞讬诐 砖讬讻讜诇 诇讛住讬讟 注诇 讛讗讚诐 讜注诇 讛讘讛诪讛 砖讻讜讞谉 专注 讟诪讗

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Oholot 18:6): With regard to one who walks in an area in which uncertainty exists concerning the location of a grave or corpse [beit haperas], if he treads over stones that he can move as he walks, raising concerns that he might have moved a bone of a corpse and thereby rendered himself impure, or if he was in that location, on the back of a person or riding on an animal that had little strength, he is impure, as he is considered to have moved the impurity himself.

讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讚诐 砖讻讜讞讜 专注 讗诪专 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讻诇 砖专讜讻讘讜 讜讗专讻讘讜转讬讜 谞讜拽砖讜转 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讘讛诪讛 砖讻讜讞讛 专注 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讻诇 砖专讜讻讘讛 诪讟讬诇讛 讙诇诇讬诐

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of a person that has little strength? Reish Lakish said: Any person whose knees knock against each other when someone rides upon him. What are the circumstances of an animal that has little strength? The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai say: Any animal that releases excrement due to strain when a person rides upon it.

讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 诇转驻诇讛 讜诇转驻讬诇讬谉 讗专讘注讛 拽讘讬谉

搂 As the Gemara has cited the rulings of the school of Rabbi Yannai with regard to measurements, it now cites similar halakhot that the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai state: With regard to prayer and with regard to phylacteries, the measure is four kav.

诇转驻诇讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛谞讜砖讗 诪砖讗讜讬 注诇 讻转讬驻讜 讜讛讙讬注 讝诪谉 转驻诇讛 驻讞讜转 诪讗专讘注讛 拽讘讬谉 诪驻砖讬诇讬谉 诇讗讞讜专讬讜 讜诪转驻诇诇 讗专讘注讛 拽讘讬谉 诪谞讬讞 注诇 讙讘讬 拽专拽注 讜诪转驻诇诇

The Gemara inquires: What is the relevance of this measure with regard to prayer? This is as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to one who carries a load on his shoulder and the time for prayer arrives, if the load is less than four kav, he lowers it behind him while still holding it and prays, as a light load of this size does not interfere with prayer. If the load is four kav, he places it on the ground and prays.

诇转驻讬诇讬谉 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 谞讜砖讗 诪砖讗讜讬 注诇 专讗砖讜 讜转驻讬诇讬谉 讘专讗砖讜 讗诐 讛讬讜 转驻讬诇讬谉 专讜爪爪讜转 讗住讜专 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 诪讜转专 讘讗讬讝讜 诪砖讗讜讬 讗诪专讜 讘诪砖讗讜讬 砖诇 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉

What is the relevance of this amount with regard to phylacteries? This is as it is taught in a baraita: If a man was carrying a load on his head and he had phylacteries on his head, if the phylacteries were being crushed under the load it is forbidden to leave them on his head, but if they were not being crushed, it is permitted. With regard to which load did the Sages state this halakha? They stated it with regard to a load of four kav.

转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讛诪讜爪讬讗 讝讘诇 注诇 专讗砖讜 讜转驻讬诇讬谉 讘专讗砖讜 讛专讬 讝讛 诇讗 讬住诇拽诐 诇爪讚讚讬谉 讜诇讗 讬拽砖专诐 讘诪转谞讬讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 谞讜讛讙 讘讛谉 诪谞讛讙 讘讝讬讜谉 讗讘诇 拽讜砖专诐 注诇 讝专讜注讜 讘诪拽讜诐 转驻讬诇讬谉

Rabbi 岣yya teaches: With regard to one who removes garbage by carrying it on his head and has phylacteries on his head, he may not move the phylacteries to the side to prevent them from being crushed, and likewise he may not tie the phylacteries of the head to his loins because he thereby treats them in a manner of degradation. But he may tie them on his arm in the location where the phylacteries of the hand are placed.

诪砖讜诐 讚讘讬 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗驻讬诇讜 诪讟驻讞转 砖诇讛谉 讗住讜专 诇讛谞讬讞 注诇 讛专讗砖 砖讬砖 讘讜 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜讻诪讛 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讗驻讬诇讜 专讘注讗 讚专讘注讗 讚驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗

The Sages said in the name of the school of Sheila: It is forbidden to place on the head of one that has phylacteries on it even the scarf in which they are wrapped. The Gemara asks: And how much does Rabbi Sheila permit one to place on his head while wearing phylacteries? Abaye said: Even as little as one-quarter of one-quarter of the smallest measurement of Pumbedita is still forbidden from being placed on one鈥檚 head.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讗讬 拽爪讘讛 讘讻专讬 讗诇讗 讗诐 讬砖 讘讜 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛 讜讻诪讛 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗专讘注讛 住讗讬谉 诇讻讜专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讚讬诇讬讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜谞转 住讗讬谉 诇讻讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 住讘讗 诇专讘 讞诪讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 讗住讘专讛 诇讱 讘砖谞讬 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛讜讛 砖诪讬谞讗 讗专注讗 讘砖谞讬 讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 讛讜讛 讻讞讬砖讗 讗专注讗

搂 The mishna teaches: Rabbi Yehuda says: What fixed measure is a pile? Rather, the relevant issue is whether it has a crop equivalent to the measure of seeds for dropping in a field in order to sow it. The Gemara asks: And how much is聽equivalent聽to聽the measure of seeds for dropping in a field in order to sow it? Rabbi Ami says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: Four se鈥檃 for the amount of land sufficient to grow a kor. Rabbi Ami himself, though, says eight se鈥檃 for the amount of land sufficient to grow a kor. A certain elder said to Rav 岣ma, son of Rabba bar Avuh: I will explain it to you: In the years of Rabbi Yo岣nan the land was fat, while in the years of Rabbi Ami the land was lean, and it was therefore necessary to double the amount of seed for each unit of land.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讛专讜讞 砖驻讬讝专讛 讗转 讛注讜诪专讬谉 讗讜诪讚讬诐 讗讜转讛 讻诪讛 诇拽讟 专讗讜讬讛 诇注砖讜转 讜谞讜转谉 诇注谞讬讬诐 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 谞讜转谉 诇注谞讬讬诐 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Pe鈥檃 5:1): If the wind scattered the standing sheaves so that it is no longer known which gleanings fell from the sheaves during the harvest and belong to the poor, one evaluates how many gleanings it was fit to produce, and he gives these to the poor. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He gives to the poor the amount聽equivalent to聽the measure of seeds dropping聽in the course of harvesting.

讜讻诪讛 讻讚讬 谞驻讬诇讛 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讚讬诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉 诇讻讜专 讘注讬 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诇讻讜专 讝专注 讗讜 诇讻讜专 转讘讜讗讛 诇诪驻讜诇转 讬讚 讗讜 诇诪驻讜诇转 砖讜讜专讬诐

The Gemara asks: And how much is the amount equivalent to the measure of seeds dropping聽in the course of harvesting? When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael he said that Rabbi Elazar said, and some say it was Rabbi Yo岣nan: Four kav for a kor. Rabbi Yirmeya raised a dilemma: Does this mean for a field that requires a kor of seed to plant it, or for a kor of produce? And if it is the former, does it refer to sowing by hand or to sowing by oxen?

转讗 砖诪注 讚讻讬 讗转讬 专讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讜讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗专讘注转 拽讘讬谉 诇讻讜专 讝专注 讜注讚讬讬谉 转讘注讬 诇讱 诇诪驻讜诇转 讬讚 讗讜 诇诪驻讜诇转 砖讜讜专讬诐 转讬拽讜

The Gemara answers: Come and hear, as when Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael he said that Rabbi Avuh said that Rabbi Elazar said, and some say that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Four kav for a field sown with a kor of seed. The Gemara comments: And the other question should still raise a dilemma for you: Does this refer to sowing by hand or to sowing by oxen? No answer was found for this question, and the dilemma shall stand unresolved.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽讘诇 砖讚讛 诪讞讘讬专讜 讜讗讻诇讛 讞讙讘 讗讜 谞砖讚驻讛 讗诐 诪讻转 诪讚讬谞讛 讛讬讗 诪谞讻讛 诇讜 诪谉 讞讻讜专讜 讗诐 讗讬谞讛 诪讻转 诪讚讬谞讛 讗讬谉 诪谞讻讛 诇讜 诪谉 讞讻讜专讜 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 拽讬讘诇讛 讛讬诪谞讜 讘诪注讜转 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 讗讬谞讜 诪谞讻讛 诇讜 诪讞讻讜专讜

MISHNA: In the case of one who receives a field from another to cultivate and grasshoppers consumed it or it was wind blasted, if it is a regional disaster which affected all the fields in the area, the cultivator subtracts from the produce he owes as part of his tenancy. If it is not a regional disaster, the cultivator does not subtract from the produce he owes as part of his tenancy. Rabbi Yehuda says: If the cultivator received it from the owner for a fixed sum of money, whether this way, i.e., there is a regional disaster, or whether that way, i.e., there was no regional disaster, he does not subtract the produce he owes as part of his tenancy.

讙诪壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 诪讻转 诪讚讬谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讻讙讜谉 讚讗讬砖讚讜祝 专讜讘讗 讚讘讗讙讗 注讜诇讗 讗诪专 讻讙讜谉 砖谞砖转讚驻讜 讗专讘注 砖讚讜转 诪讗专讘注 专讜讞讜转讬讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of a regional disaster? Rav Yehuda said: If, for example, most of that valley in which the field was located was wind blasted, it is considered a regional disaster. Ulla said: If, for example, four fields were wind blasted on its four sides, it is considered a regional disaster.

讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讘注讜 讘诪注专讘讗 谞砖讚祝 转诇诐 讗讞讚 注诇 驻谞讬 讻讜诇讛 诪讗讬 谞砖转讬讬专 转诇诐 讗讞讚 注诇 驻谞讬 讻讜诇讛 诪讛讜 讗驻住讬拽讗 讘讬专讗 诪讗讬 讗住驻住转讗

Ulla also said: They raise the following dilemma in the West, Eretz Yisrael: If one furrow was wind blasted along its entire length, adjacent to other fields that were wind blasted, what is the halakha? Is this considered to be part of the regional disaster? Conversely, if one furrow remained undamaged along its entire length, what is the halakha? Does the remaining furrow mean that the entire field is not considered to be part of the regional disaster? If a fallow field divided between the cultivated fields and the fields that were wind blasted, what is the halakha? Alternatively, if there was a field of fodder between this field and the others that were wind blasted,

Scroll To Top