Today’s daf is sponsored by Rochelle Cheifetz in loving memory of her paternal grandmother’s yahrzeit, Esther bat Avraham.
Today’s daf is dedicated in memory of Rabbi Meir Shapiro, the Daf Yomi visionary, on his 89th yahrzeit.
Rav Papa continues to ask whether yadot are effective for charity or for declaring one’s possessions ownerless. Ravina asks if yadot are effective when designating an area as a bathroom? Ravina was actually unsure in general whether designating an area as a bathroom is effective to forbid one from reciting kriat shema there. And then he deliberated that even if one were to say it is effective, were one to designate it with cut-off language (a yad), would it be effective as well. There is no answer to all the questions asked. Rabbi Akiva (in the Mishna) was inclined to rule stringently if one said “I am menudeh to you,” and treated it as a vow. Abaye claims that Rabbi Akiva would not give someone lashes if they broke this vow as the language of the Mishna indicates that he is not sure what the law is and therefore rules stringently, but one would therefore not get punished for it. In what wording exactly is there a dispute between him and the sages? Rav Papa and Rav Chisda disagree on this matter. Because they mentioned the language of ex-communication, the Gemara discusses several laws related to ex-communication. If one dissolves an ex-communication, do they do that in the presence of the person who was excommunicated or not? On what does it depend? He who uses God’s name in vain should be excommunicated. Some laws of ex-communication are derived from a story about a woman who uses God’s name in vain and was excommunicated, but they immediately dissolved the ex-communication. A scholar who has put himself into ex-communication can also dissolve his own ex-communication. This is proven from a case with Mar Zutra the Chasid.
