1)
The Mishnah in Ohalos states that if one finds an unknown corpse buried in a regular position, in a place that one intends to use for Taharos, 'Notlo ve'es Tefusaso', and the same applies to two corpses. What does this mean? What is the Shi'ur of 'Tefusaso'?
What do we learn from the Pasuk in Vay'chi "u'Nesasani mi'Mitzrayim"?
By what right does one move him? Why does the corpse not automatically acquire its place?
How would the Din differ if the dead person was obviously murdered (e.g. if it had been cut up)?
The same would also apply if the corpse was not lying in the regular position of burial. Why is that?
1)
The Mishnah in Ohalos states that if one finds an unknown corpse buried in a regular position, in a place that one intends to use for Taharos, 'Notlo ve'es Tefusaso' - when one relocates a corpse, one must also relocate it together with 'Tefusaso' (three Tefachim [finger breadths, see Hagahos ha'Bach]) of earth, and the same applies to two corpses.
We learn from the Pasuk in Vay'chi "u'Nesasani mi'Mitzrayim" that - when one relocates a corpse, one must take some earth with it.
The corpse does not automatically acquire his place in this case - because (bearing in mind that it is not a burial-ground), we presume that it was buried there only temporarily (perhaps because the person died on Erev Shabbos close to dusk, and there was no time to bury it in his rightful burial place), to be re-buried later (see Ritva).
If the person would have obviously been murdered (e.g. if the corpse was cut up) - the corpse would be moved without the earth.
The same would also apply if the corpse was not lying in the regular position of burial - because then we would assume that the corpse was that of a Nochri.
2)
Someone who discovers a Shechunas Kevaros, is not permitted to move the corpses at all. What constitutes a Shechunas Kevaros? Between what distances must the corpses be lying?
What is then the size of a burial cave, according to this Tana?
How many Kuchin will then fit into ...
... the wall of four Amos?
... one of the walls of eight Amos?
And how much space does this Tana require ...
... between two Kuchin?
... between the last Kuch on any of the sides and the corner?
2)
Someone who discovers a Shechunas Kevaros, is not permitted to move the corpses at all. A Shechunas Kevaros comprises three corpses lying side by side, with not less than four Amos between the first and third corpse and not more than eight.
The size of a burial cave, according to this Tana is - four by eight Amos.
One will then be able to fit into ...
... the wall of four Amos three Kuchin.
... one of the walls of eight Amos six Kuchin.
And this Tana requires ...
... two Tefachim between two Kuchin (see Tosfos DH 'me'Arba').
... one Tefach between the last Kuch on any of the sides and the corner.
3)
What areas must one search if one discovers a Shechunas Kevaros?
If the three graves are within eight Amos, and not four Amos apart, why is one obligated to search further than the next grave-site. Why, assuming that one does not find a Kuch there, do we not assume that it cannot be a Shechunas Kevaros?
What must one do if one finds another corpse twenty Amos away? Why is that?
3)
If one discovers a Shechunas Kevaros, one is obligated to search twenty Amos diagonally both from the northernmost corpse towards the south (on the assumption that it is the first of the six Kuchin on the side adjacent to the Chatzer), and from the southernmost corpse towards the south (since one has no way of knowing in which direction the Me'arah is situated). Note: it is unclear why, if the three corpses are four Amos apart, one does not assume that they are from the side facing the Chatzer and search to the right, to the left or opposite (twenty Amos away in either direction, according to the Rabbanan (see Tosfos Yom Tov Nazir 9: DH 'Bodek Heimenu').
Even if the three graves are within eight Amos, and not four Amos apart, one is nevertheless obligated to search further than the next grave-site - because, even assuming that one does not find a Kuch there, we do not presume that it cannot be a Shechunas Kevarim, in case there was an unoccupied Kuch there that caved in.
If one finds another corpse twenty Amos away one is obligated to continue to search twenty Amos beyond that, 'she'Yesh Raglayim le'Davar' (since there is now sound reason to believe that the entire area has been designated as a Shechunas Kevaros).
4)
What is now the problem with the Mishnah in Ohalos, from the Machlokes between the Tana Kama and Rebbi Shimon in our Mishnah?
We establish the author of the Mishnah in Ohalos as Rebbi Shimon, but according to the opinion of Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah in a Beraisa. What does the Tana Kama there say about someone who found many corpses with less than four to eight Amos between them?
And what does Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah Amar Rebbi Shimon say?
4)
The problem with the Mishnah in Ohalos, from the Machlokes in our Mishnah between the Tana Kama (who gives the measurement of a cave as four by six Amos) and Rebbi Shimon (six by eight) is that - the Mishnah in Ohalos does not go like either of them (so who is the author)?
We establish the author of the Mishnah in Ohalos as Rebbi Shimon, but according to the opinion of Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah in a Beraisa. The Tana Kama there rules that if someone found many corpses with less than four to eight Amos between them - they are considered individual corpses and not part of a Shechunas Kevaros.
Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah Amar Rebbi Shimon rules that - we consider the excess bodies as if they were not there, giving the remaining ones the Din of a Shechunas Kevaros.
5)
What problem do we have from the Seifa ("Bodek mimenu u'Lehalan Esrim Amah") with the Reisha, which we established like Rebbi Shimon?
Why does it not at first seem any better to establish the Seifa like the Rabbanan?
We do in fact, establish the Seifa like the Rabbanan. How do we resolve the latter problem?
How does this enable us to arrive at twenty Amos?
5)
The problem from the Seifa ('Bodek mimenu u'Lehalan Esrim Amah') with the Reisha, which we established like Rebbi Shimon is that - according to Rebbi Shimon, he ought to search, not twenty Amos, but twenty-two (sixteen Amos along the walls of the two Me'aros, and six Amos along the Chatzer [which itself, does not of course, require searching).
Nor does it at first seem any better to establish the Seifa like the Rabbanan - according to whom eighteen Amos should suffice (twelve Amos along the walls of the two Me'aros and six along the Chatzer).
We do in fact, establish the Seifa like the Rabbanan, and we resolve the problem - by requiring the search of the cave to be performed diagonally (in case the corpses are not all the same size or the Kuchin are not all level).
This enables us to arrive at twenty Amos - because, just as the hypotenuse of a triangle whose two short sides is two Amos more (5x1/5), as we explained earlier, so too, will the hypotenuse of a triangle whose short sides are six by four (the cave times the length of the Kuch) will be two Amos more than the longer side, making it eight Amos. (This is strange however, since we know that the hypotenuse of a triangle of six by four Amos is a little over seven Amos, only a fraction more than that of one of five by five Amos ([see also Tosfos at the foot of the Amud]).
6)
On what grounds do we query the previous answer?
How do we resolve this latter problem? Why do we not require a search of twenty-two Amos according to the Rabbanan?
6)
We query the previous answer however inasmuch as - if that was the case, then again, he ought to search twenty-two Amos, seeing as one would assume that he searches the second cave diagonally, just as he did, the first.
We resolve this problem however by answering that - Chazal did not obligate him to search the second cave diagonally (since he found nothing more in the first cave), in which case eighteen Amos will suffice.
102b----------------------------------------102b
7)
Rav Shisha b'rei d'Rav Idi (whom we cited earlier), establishes the Seifa too, like Rebbi Shimon. Then how does he account for having to search twenty Amos and not twenty-two?
In that case, why do we not assume the second cave too, to be for still-born babies, in which case eighteen Amos ought to suffice?
7)
Rav Shisha b'rei d'Rav Idi whom we cited earlier, establishes the Seifa too, like Rebbi Shimon, and he accounts for having to search twenty Amos and not twenty-two - because the bodies that he found were those of still-born babies, in which case we assume that the cave in which he found them was designated for still-born babies, whose measurement is only six by six Amos (according to Rebbi Shimon [and not six by eight]).
Nevertheless, we do not assume the second cave too, to be for still-born babies, in which case eighteen Amos ought to suffice - because it is unusual to designate both caves in one Shechunas Kevaros for still-born babies.
8)
We now query both Rebbi Shimon and the Rabbanan from their own respective rulings in the Mishnah in Kil'ayim 'Kerem she'Natu'a al Pachos me'Arba Amos, Rebbi Shimon Omer, Eino Kerem'. Why is that?
What do the Chachamim say?
What is now the problem?
How do we reconcile ...
... Rebbi Shimon here with Rebbi Shimon in the Beraisa?
... the Chachamim with the Chachamim there?
8)
We now query both Rebbi Shimon and the Rabbanan from their own respective rulings in the Mishnah in Kil'ayim 'Kerem she'Natu'a al Pachos me'Arba Amos, Rebbi Shimon Omer, Eino Kerem' - because since the trees are so tightly packed, it is not considered a vineyard.
The Chachamim rule - 'Harei Zeh Kerem, ve'Ro'in es ha'Emtza'ayim Ke'ilu Einan'.
The problem is that Rebbi Shimon (who said earlier [regarding many corpses that someone finds with less than four to eight Amos between them] 'Ro'in es ha'Emtza'ayim Ke'ilu Einan, ve'ha'Sha'ar Mitztarfin ... ') and the Rabbanan ('Yesh lahen Tefusah, ve'Ein Lahen Shechunas Kevaros') have switched their opinions.
To reconcile the apparent contradiction in ...
... Rebbi Shimon - he will have to hold that on the one hand, someone may have to bury a corpse close to dusk on Erev Shabbos, with the intention of relocating the corpse at a later date, whereas on the other, nobody plants trees with the intention of relocating them (and since he planted them permanently, the excessive number of trees negates the Din of a vineyard).
... the Chachamim - they will hold that on the one hand, people sometimes plant many trees with the intention of pulling out those that do not grow well, whereas on the other, since so many corpses are buried in close proximity, it is disgusting and is not called a burial.
9)
Our Mishnah discusses a case where Reuven sells Shimon land the size of a Beis-Kur of earth. If ten Eifah comprise a Beis-Kur (a Chomer), how many Sa'ah comprise ...
... an Eifah?
... a Beis-Kur?
Which ditches and rocks are precluded from the sale and which are not?
In addition to being ten Tefachim deep or high, how wide must the former have to be, to be precluded from the sale?
What is the reason for the above ruling?
9)
Our Mishnah discusses a case where Reuven sells Shimon land the size of a Beis-Kur of earth. Ten Eifah comprise a Beis-Kur (a Chomer) ...
... three Sa'ah comprise an Eifah (a Bas) and ...
... thirty Sa'ah, a Beis-Kur.
Ditches and rocks that are - at least ten Tefachim deep or tall (respectively) are precluded from the sale, whereas those that are less, are not.
In addition to being at least ten Tefachim deep or tall, the former must also be - at least four by four Tefachim wide (like we find with regard to the Reshuyos on Shabbos) to be precluded from the sale.
The reason for the above ruling is - because a purchaser who buys one field (in order to sow, as 'Beis-Kur Afar' implies), wants to be able to plow and sow what he bought in one go, and not as if it is two fields.
10)
What will be the Din ...
... if he omits the word 'Afar'?
... if he says 'Beis-Kur Karka ... '?
Why is that?
And what will the Din be if he says 'ke'Beis-Kur Afar ... '?
Why is that?
What is then the implication of the word 'Afar'?
10)
If he ...
... omits the word 'Afar' - then the purchaser will have to accept the land even if it consists of nothing but ditches or rocks, and the same will apply if he ...
... says 'Beis-Kur Karka ... ' ...
... because - since it is possible for the seller to have sold it to him to build on or to spread out fruit to dry, the purchaser has the underhand.
Whereas if he says 'ke'Beis-Kur Afar ... ' - then the purchaser will have to accept even ditches that are deeper than ten Tefachim and rocks that are more than ten Tefachim tall ...
... because besides the ke being superfluous, ke'Beis-Kur also implies a Beis-Kur as is ...
... and the word 'Afar' - implies that he is selling him the land for plowing and sowing, and that consequently, Shimon is not obligated to accept infertile land that exceeds four Kabin (two-thirds of a Sa'ah) per Beis-Kur.