Revach L'Neshama http://revach.net/ RSS feed for - Section: DAF YOMI Copyright 2007, Revach L'Neshama en-US Revach L'Neshama Logo 144 31 http://revach.net/img/small_header.jpg http://revach.net/ info@revach.net Wed, 28 Jun 2017 03:00:00 -0700 240 Bava Basra 158 - SUMMARY 1.  Mishna - When the house collapses on a husband and wife and we don't know who died first a.  The Kesuba - Bais Shammai says the respective Yorshim split it and Bais Hillel says it goes to the Yorshei HaBaal. b.  Nichsei Milug - Bais Shammai says the respective Yorshim split it and Bais Hillel says it goes to the Yorshim of the wife. c. Nichsei Tzon Barzel - Bais Shammai says the respective Yorshim split it and Bais Hillel says it remains in the current Chazaka 2.  There is a Machlokes if Bais Hillel by Nichsei Tzon Barzel holds that the Chazaka is for the Yorshei HaBaal or for the wife's Yorshim or they split it.  (1) 3.  Mishna - When the house collapses on a mother and son and we don't know who died first the Tanna Kama says the Yorshim of the mother and son split it but Rebbi Akiva holds that even here Bais Hillel would say we go with the Chazaka. 4.  Chazaka by a mother's property lies with Yorshim of the mother's yorshim since her possessions were always part of the Shevet of her family's Nachala. 5.  The air of Eretz Yisroel makes one smarter. 6.  Ben Azzai was a Talmid Chaver of Rebbi Akiva.
 
**A BIT MORE**
1. The original owner was the Father of the wife (Rebbi Yochanan) but since the husband incurs all losses and gains he becomes the Muchzak (Rebbi Elazar). Raish Lakish holds that Bais Hillel held that it should be split because each one has a claim to chazaka.

]]>
Bava Basra 158 - HALACHA A Husband and Wife Die in a Building The Shulchan Aruch (Even Ha'ezer 90:6) rules in accordance with Bais Hillel. In the case where both the husband and wife die due to a building collapse, and it's not clear who died first, the halacha is that the kesuba goes to the inheritors of the husband, the nichsei milug to the inheritors of the wife, and the nichsei tzon barzel they split evenly. Obviously this only applies if they didn't have children together, for if they did, it wouldn't make a difference who died first, since the children inherit everything. Although a woman normally needs to make a shvuah (that she never collected it yet) in order to collect nichsei tzon barzel (ibid 96:1), in this case we allow her, and now that she died - her inheritors, to collect it. Since the reason why a woman needs to make a shvuah is because we are suspicious that she might have taken some items before he died, but in our case where he died suddenly, we don't assume that she took anything (Chelkas Michokek).

]]>
Bava Basra 157 - SUMMARY 1.  It is a Machlokes Tana'im whether Rebbi Eliezer holds a Matnas Shechiv Meira works on Shabbos or on weekday but everyone holds that according to Rebbi Eliezer it only works in one of the cases.  (1) 2.  Mishna - When the house collapses and kills father and son.  Who inherits who? 3.  If you write Achrayos in a Shtar on future land acquisitions (Shelo Ba L'Olam), according to Rebbi Meir they are Mishubad to the Malveh and he can be Toreif From the subsequent buyer or inheritor.  We don't know what the Chachomim would hold.  (2) 3.  It is a Mitzva on the Yesomim to pay their father's loans only if there is a Shtar. 4.  If the Chachomim hold that a future acquisition is not Mishubad even if he writes D'Ikni, then a Shtar Me'uchar is pasul.  (3) 5.  If the Chachomim hold that a future acquisition is not Mishubad even if he writes D'Ikni, then a Baal Chov cannot be Toreif the Shvach of the field of the buyer since the Shvach came after the loan. 6.  If a person took two subsequent loans and wrote D'Ikni on both, it is a Machlokes if the first one has a Shibud on the acquisitions over the second, or they both have equal pro rata Shibud.
 
**A BIT MORE**
1. Our Mishna holds he holds it works only on Shabbos. According to everyone Rebbi Yehoshua holds it works both on weekday and Shabbos. 2. By Kinyan, Rebbi Meir hold it works and certainly by Shibud of something that was already in the world. The Chachomim hold you cannot be makneh Davar Shelo Ba L'Olam but the question remains about Shibud. 3. A land acquisition may take place after the loan but before the date of the Shtar and it would be wrongly be Mishubad to the lender even though it was acquired after the actual loan.

]]>
Bava Basra 157 - HALACHA Who Died First? The Mishna had a case where both a father and son died in a building that collapsed on them, and the son owed money to a baal chov but has no money of his own. The question is, who died first? If the father died first then the son inherits him and now has money in which to repay the loan. Or maybe the son died first and never inherited his father, so this inheritance can't be claimed by the baal chov, and the money would go to the father's inheritors. Bais Hillel rules that the money stays with its chazaka. Which means that the money goes to the father's inheritors and the baal chov can't collect that money. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 280:12) follows the opinion of Bais Hillel. The S'ma explains that this doesn't necessarily mean that the son died first. For even if the father died first and then the son (which would mean that the baal chov should be able to claim the money), we would still rule that the baal chov cannot collect the money. The reason for this is, since they are vadai (certainly) also the inheritors of the son, while the baal chov is a safek (in doubt) if he can get the money (i.e. maybe the father didn't die first), and we have a rule that "a safek can't take money from a vadai". The Rema cites a Mordechai, in a bit of a complex case, where a father and mother of four daughters all died when a building collapsed on them. The inheritors of the father (his brothers) claim that if the father or any of the daughters died last, that person would inherit the kesuba from her deceased mother, and therefore they get the entire inheritance. While the inheritors of the mother (her brothers) claim that she died last, and her kesuba is activated, and part of the inheritance has to go towards payment of her kesuba. The halacha is that both inheritors split the inheritance, because of the concept of "kol kevuah kimechtzah al mechtzah". Which means that since they were all in one building at the time of collapse they all have they same status, and we can't assume which one died first. The S'ma further quotes the Mordechai that his would be the halacha, even if the case would have been that they were in the process of exiting the building at the time of collapse. Because then we would say "kol diparish meirubah parish" and probably four of the five (the father and his four daughters) died first, and one of them and the mother died after that. Which brings us back to a mechtzah al mechtzah, and the inheritors split the inheritance.

]]>
Bava Basra 156 - SUMMARY 1.  A Matana is valid from anyone over 13 years old, even if he has no business sense.  (1) 2.  For Kidushin, Geirushin and Chalitza, it is not enough that the boy is over 13.  We must check for Shtei Saaros. 3.  A girl can do Mi'un until she brings Shtei Saaros even if she is over 12. 4.  Mishna - Rebbi Eliezer does not that Matnas Shechiv Meira is valid without a Kinyan. 5.  It is a Machlokes if it is Klei HaKerem if you grow thorns in a vineyard. 6.  Rebbi Eliezer held that Bnei Roichel were Reshaim and the Chachomim validated the Matnas Shechiv Meira to the daughter even though Matnas Shechiv Meira is not valid without a Kinyan. 7.  Mishna - Rebbi Eliezer holds Matnas Shechiv Meira works with his words alone only on Shabbos.
 
**A BIT MORE**
1. Unlike land sales where a 13-20 year must exhibit business sense to effect a sale. The reason is that he would not give away something for nothing so we assume the recipient did something to warrant the gift.

]]>
Bava Basra 156 - HALACHA Can a Shchiv Meira make a Kinyan on Shabbos? In today's daf we learned that a shchiv meira may make a Kinyan on Shabbos. By way of introduction we earned over the last few dafim that there are several categories. 1)Shchiv Meira - a person that is deathly ill, no kinyan is required if he gave away all of his possessions, however if he only gave away part of his possessions then a kinyan is required. 2) Matnas Bari - a gift from a healthy person, a kinyan is required. 3)Mitzva Machmas Misah - a gift that was given for fear that one's end was near, a kinyan is not required. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 254:1) rules that a shchiv meira may make a kinyan on Shabbos if he wants to, even though there is no need for it, since a gift from a shchiv meira is automatically considered as if a document was drawn up and given over to the recipient. It is important to note that normally one may not make a kinyan on Shabbos, however since we are concerned for the shchiv meira's health and we don't want to cause him anguish, we override this halacha. The Rema cites a different opinion that holds that a shchiv meira may even make a kinyan where one is required, for example he only gave away part of his possessions, even though it is not apparent that he fears his end is near. Although according to the previous paragraph this case would need a kinyan, since he only gave away part of his possessions and this is not mitzva machmas misah, and if a kinyan is really acquired then this should not be allowed on Shabbos? This is in fact the reason of the Mechaber that permits a kinyan only where none is really needed, for that is not in violation of the halacha that a kinyan cannot be made on Shabbos, for this is not a real kinyan. However the Rema holds that the reason of not causing a shchiv meira anguish, is enough to allow a kinyan even in such an instance.

]]>