Mishnah 1
1)
The Mishnah discusses a Get Pashut (a regular Get) and a Get Mekushar. In what way is the latter different than an ordinary Get?
Why did Chazal institute a Get Mekushar?
Does the concept of a Get Mekushar apply to other Sh'taros?
The Tana Kama invalidates a Get Pashut whose witnesses signed on the outside and a Get Mekushar whose witnesses signed on the inside. On what grounds does Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel disagree with the latter ruling?
1)
The Mishnah discusses a Get Pashut (a regular Get) and a Get Mekushar, which differs from a Get Pashut - inasmuch as the Get begins with a blank line and that (at least three or four times) one leaves every second line of the Sh'tar blank. The witnesses are obligated to sign at the back of each blank space, and after folding the blank line over the next line of writing, each fold is subsequently stitched.
Chazal instituted a Get Mekushar - for the benefit of the Kohanim, who tend to be short-tempered, and who are liable to divorce their wives hastily. Then, when they calm down, they are sorry, too late, since they can no longer take their wives back. So Chazal instituted a Get Mekushar, which takes a long time to write, providing them with the required cooling down period, during which they are able to retract.
Chazal extended the concept of Get Mekushar - to other Sh'taros too (so as not differentiate between one Sh'tar and another.
The Tana Kama invalidates a Get Pashut whose witnesses signed on the outside and a Get Mekushar whose witnesses signed on the inside. Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel disagrees with the latter ruling - since all that is needed is not to stitch the folds and it will become a Get Pashut (See also Tosfos Yom-Tov).
2)
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel rules 'ha'Kol ke'Minhag ha'Medinah'. What problem do we have with this? Why can it not be understood literally?
What will therefore be the Din in a case where the Minhag ha'Medinah is to write a Get Pashut, and the Shali'ach wrote a Get Mekushar, or vice-versa, and gave it to the woman?
In which case are the Tana Kama and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel then arguing?
What is the basis of their Machlokes?
Like whom is the Halachah?
2)
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel rules 'ha'Kol ke'Minhag ha'Medinah'. The problem with understanding this literally is that - 'ha'Kol ke'Minhag ha'Medinah' is an accepted principle, and there is no reason for the Rabbanan to disagree with it.
Consequently, in a case where the Minhag ha'Medinah is to write a Get Pashut and the Shali'ach wrote a Get Mekushar, or vice-versa, and gave it to the woman - the Get will be Pasul, according to all opinions.
The Machlokes between the Tana Kama and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is - in a case where both Minhagim are prevalent, and the husband instructed the Shali'ach to write a Get Mekushar and he wrote a Get Pashut, or vice-versa.
The Tana Kama holds that - the husband meant exactly what he said, and that since the Shali'ach deviated from his instructions, the Get is invalid; whereas according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel - it is Kasher, because, since the Minhag allows for both types of Get, based on the principle 'Mar'eh Makom Hu lo', we say that he is not fussy.
The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.
Mishnah 2
3)
What is the minimum number of witnesses that need to sign on a Get ...
... Pashut?
... Mekushar?
What is the Tana coming to teach us when he says that a Get Pashut on which only one witness signed and a Get Mekushar on which only two witnesses signed is Pasul?
3)
The minimum number of witness that need to sign on a Get ...
... Pashut is -two.
... Mekushar - is three.
When the Tana says that a Get Pashut on which only one witness signed and a Get Mekushar on which only two witnesses signed is Pasul, he is coming to teach us - that just as the former is Pasul min ha'Torah, so too is the latter (See Tos. Yom-To), even though it contains two witnesses.
4)
How many Zuzim (Dinrim) are there in ...
... a Manah?
... a Sela?
What does the Mishnah rule in a case where they wrote in the Sh'tar 'a hundred Zuzim which are equivalent to ...
... twenty Sela'im'?
... thirty Sela'im'?
Then why did they insert ...
... 'a hundred Zuzim' in the first case?
... 'thirty Sela'im in the latter case?
Which principle governs both of these rulings?
4)
There are ...
... a hundred Zuzim (Dinrim) in a Manah.
... four Zuzim in a Sela.
The Mishnah rules in a case where they wrote in the Sh'tar 'a hundred Zuzim which are equivalent to ...
... twenty Sela'im' that - the claimant receives only twenty Sela'im.
... thirty Sela'im' - that he receives only a Manah.
And when they inserted ...
... 'a hundred Zuzim' in the first case, they meant - a hundred poor-quality Zuzim.
... 'thirty Sela'im in the latter case - they meant thirty poor-quality Sela'im.
The principle that governs these rulings is - 'Yad Ba'al ha'Sh'tar al ha'Tachtonah' (The claimant always has the underhand).
5)
What does the Mishnah say about a case where the Sh'tar states ...
... 'Kesef ... Zuzim', or ... Sela'in', or '(golden) Darkonos' ... 'which are ... ', and the amount has been erased?
... 'Manah' (a hundred Zuz) at the beginning and 'two hundred' at the end, or vice-versa?
On what condition do we say that?
Then why does one write the beginning of the Sh'tar at all?
5)
The Mishnah rules that in a case where the Sh'tar states ...
... 'Kesef ... Zuzim', or ... Sela'in', or '(golden) Darkonos' ... 'which are ... ', and the amount has been erased - the owner of the Sh'tar can claim two of whichever coin is mentioned (See Tiferes Yisrael).
... 'Manah' (a hundred Zuz) at the beginning and 'two hundred' at the end, or vice-versa - he receives the second amount (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
... provided the latter is not written on the last line of the Sh'tar (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
And the reason that one writes the beginning of the Sh'tar is - so that, should a letter be missing from the latter part of the SH'tar, one can check it out from the beginning.
Mishnah 3
6)
What does the Mishnah say about writing a Get for a woman when she is not present?
On what condition is this permitted?
Why is this necessary?
6)
The Mishnah permits writing ... a Get for a woman when she is not present (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
... provided the Sofer and the witnesses recognize both of them ...
... in case the Sofer writes it in the name of another couple who have the same names as the current one (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
7)
The Tana issues the same ruling with regard to writing a Shover when the husband is not present. What is a 'Shover'?
What is it for?
Why, in this case, is it necessary for the Sofer and the witnesses to recognize both parties?
Who pays the Sofer?
7)
The Tana issues the same ruling with regard to writing a Shover when the husband is not present. A 'Shover' is a receipt ...
... that the woman writes upon receiving her Kesubah.
In this case too, it is necessary for the Sofer and the witnesses to recognize both parties - in case the Sofer writes the Shover in the name of another couple who have the same names ...
Here too - it is the husband who pays the Sofer (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
8)
In similar vein, the Tana permits writing a Sh'tar for the Loveh (borrower) even when the Malveh (the creditor) is not present (See Tos. Yom-Tov). What does he say about writing it for the Malveh when the Loveh is not present?
Who pays the Sofer's fee?
This incorporates a case of Iska. What is 'Iska'?
He also permits writing a Sh'tar for the seller even when the purchaser is not present. What does he say about writing it for the purchaser when the seller is not present?
Who pays the Sofer's fee?
8)
In similar vein, the Tana permits writing a Sh'tar for the Loveh (borrower) even when the Malveh (the creditor) is not present (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - but not vice-versa (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Loveh - pays the Sofer's fee.
This incorporates a case of Iska - where Reuven provides the goods, Shimon does the work, and they share the profits. There too, it is Shimon who pays the Sofer's fee (See Tos. Yom-Tov), even though Reuven benefits too.
He also permits writing a Sh'tar for the seller even when the purchaser is not present (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - but not vice-versa (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
There - it is the purchaser who pays the Sofer's fee.
Mishnah 4
9)
In whose presence must a Sh'tar Erusin (betrothal) and Nisu'in (marriage) be written?
Who pays the Sofer's fee?
Sh'tarei Arisus and Kablanus too, require both parties to be present when the Sh'tar is written. Both an Aris and a Kablan pay the owner with crops. What is the difference between them?
Who pays the Sofer's fee?
9)
A Sh'tar Erusin (betrothal) and Nisu'in (marriage) must be written in the presence of - both parties (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Chasan pays the Sofer's fee (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Sh'tarei Arisus and Kablanus too, require both parties to be present when the Sh'tar is written. Both an Aris and a Kablan pay the owner with crops - the former, a half, a third or a quarter (depending on the local custom); the latter - so many Kurim annually, irrespective of whether the field yields or whether it doesn't.
The Sofer's fee is paid by - the Mekabel (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
10)
Finally, the Mishnah requires both parties to be present when writing a Sh'tar Birurin or a Sh'tar on any matter concerning Beis-Din (See Tos. Yom-Tov). Sh'tar Birurin might mean a Sh'tar which notes the name of the Dayan that each litigant picked. What else might it mean (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?
Who pays the Sofer's fee?
According to the Tana Kama, they write one Sh'tar (Birurin), containing either the name of the Dayan that each one chose or the claims and counter-claims of each litigants. What does Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel say?
Like who is the Halachah?
10)
Finally, the Mishnah requires both parties to be present when writing a Sh'tar Birurin, either noting the name of the Dayan that each litigants picked - or the arguments that each of the litigants puts forward, or a Sh'tar on any matter concerning Beis-Din (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Both litigants - share the cost of the Sofer's fee (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
According to the Tana Kama, they write one Sh'tar (Birurin), containing either the name of the Dayan that each one chose or the claims and counter-claims of each litigants. According to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel - they write two Sh'taros, one for each litigant (See Tos.Yom-Tov).
The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 5
11)
The Mishnah discusses a case where Shimon pays Reuven part of his debt, and rather than taking the trouble to write a receipt, they hand over the Sh'tar to Levi. What does Shimon instruct Levi to do if he has not paid the balance by a certain date?
Rebbi Yossi rules that if that date arrives and Shimon has not paid, Levi should return the Sh'tar to Reuven, who may now claim the entire debt. What does Rebbi Yehudah say?
What is the basis of their Machlokes?
What is the definition of 'Asmachta'?
Like whom is the Halachah in this case?
11)
The Mishnah discusses a case where Shimon pays Reuven part of his debt, and rather than taking the trouble to write a receipt, they hand over the Sh'tar to Levi, with instructions (from Shimon) that, in the event that he fails to pay the balance by a certain date - he should return the Sh'tar to Reuven.
Rebbi Yossi rules that if that date arrives and Shimon has not paid, Levi should return the Sh'tar to Reuven, who may now claim the entire debt. Rebbi Yehudah says - that he may not return it.
The basis of their Machlokes is - whether Asmachta acquires or not.
'Asmachta' is - where Reuven promises his friend something based on a condition which he thinks he will be able to fulfill, but which it later transpires that he cannot (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Halachah is - like Rebbi Yehudah.
12)
On what condition is Asmachta Koneh?
If according to some commentaries, a Beis-Din Chashuv means any three people who are experts in the Dinim of Asmachta, how does the Rambam define it?
12)
Asmachta is Koneh - provided it is accompanied by a Kinyan in a Beis-Din Chashuv (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
If according to some commentaries, a Beis-Din Chashuv means any three people who are experts in the Dinim of Asmachta, the Rambam defines it as - a Beis-Din of Semuchim in Eretz Yisrael.
Mishnah 6
13)
What should Reuven do if his Sh'tar-Chov on Shimon has faded or became smudged?
How do we know that Shimon did not do it on purpose?
What will Beis-Din do?
13)
If his Reuven's Sh'tar-Chov on Shimon has faded or became smudged - he should bring witnesses who know when it was written and the amount that was written on the Sh'tar to Beis-Din to rewrite it (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
We know that Shimon did not do it on purpose - only if he brings witnesses to that effect.
Beis-Din - will then substantiate the new Sh'tar, specifically stating that the original one was found to be faded on such and such a date, as well as the names of the witnesses (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
14)
If Shimon pays Reuven part of his debt, Rebbi Yehudah holds Yachlif. What does 'Yachlif' mean?
What does Rebbi Yossi say?
On what grounds does Rebbi Yehudah object to writing a receipt?
14)
If Shimon pays Reuven part of his debt, Rebbi Yehudah holds 'Yachlif' - meaning that one replaces the original Sh'tar with a new one.
Rebbi Yossi says that we write a Shover (a receipt) for Shimon.
Rebbi Yehudah objects to writing a Shovar - since it means that Shimon has to guard it against mice.
15)
Rebbi Yossi justifies writing a receipt for two reasons; one, because It is correct for Shimon to have to look after the receipt. What is the other reason?
How does writing a receipt weaken Reuven'a claim?
Why is it then in order for Shimon to have to look after the receipt?
Like whom is the Halachah?
15)
Rebbi Yossi justifies writing a receipt because a. It is correct for Shimon to have to look after the receipt inasmuch as a. it encourages him to pay off his debt as quickly as possible and - b. it is not right to weaken Reuven's claim ...
... in that the new Sh'tar will be dated later that the original one, thereby depriving him of the possibility of claiming from purchasers who bought land from Shimon in between the two dates (See also Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Amar lo Rebbi Yossi').
It is nevertheless in order for Shimon to have to look after the receipt - due to the principle that 'The Loveh is a 'slave' to the Malveh.'
The Halachah is - like Rebbi Yossi.
Mishnah 7
16)
What does the Mishnah say about two sons, one wealthy and one poor, who inherit from their father a bathhouse or an oil-press, assuming the father built it ...
... for renting out (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?
... for his personal use, and the poor brother now wants to sell it, because he cannot afford the staff to run the one and olives to make oil in the other?
We learned in the first Perek that, in a case where two partners who own a courtyard that is too small to divide, we apply the principle 'Gud O Agud!' What does this mean?
Then why in our case, can the poor brother not demand that they sell it and share the proceeds?
16)
The Mishnah rules that, two sons, one wealthy and one poor, who inherited from their father a bathhouse or an oil-press, assuming the father built it ...
... for renting out - continue to rent it out and share the profits (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
... for his personal use, and the poor brother now wants to sell it, because he cannot afford the staff to run the one or olives to make oil in the other - his brother can say to him 'Go and purchase Avadim to run the bathhouse or olives to press!'
We learned in the first Perek that if two partners own a courtyard that cannot be divided, we apply the principle 'Gud O Agud!' - 'Either you sell me your half of the Chatzer or I sell you mine'.
In our case, the poor brother cannot demand that they sell the bathhouse or the oil-press and share the proceeds - because, since he does not have the money to buy his brother out, he can say 'Gud!', but is unable to say 'Agud' (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
17)
The Tana prohibits two residents of the same town who are both called Yosef ben Shimon to produce a Sh'tar-Chov against one another. Why is that?
Why does he also forbid other residents in the town to produce a Sh'tar-Chov against either of them?
And what does he say about someone finds among his Sh'taros a note stating that the Sh'tar of Yosef ben Shimon has been paid?
17)
The Tana prohibits two residents of the same town who are both called Yosef ben Shimon to produce a Sh'tar Chov against one another - because the latter can counter that the Sh'tar with which his namesake is claiming is the Sh'tar which he returned to him after he had paid off his debt (in other words, he was the creditor and the claimant, the debtor [See also Tos. Yom-Tov]).
He also forbids other residents in the town to produce a Sh'tar-Chov against either of them - since each one can claim that it is not he, but his namesake who is the debtor.
He also says that someone who finds among his Sh'taros a note stating that the Sh'tar of Yosef ben Shimon has been paid - cannot claim from either of them, because each one can now claim that he has paid (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
18)
What must they therefore do if they want to lend each other money or if someone wants to lend them?
What if their grandfathers too, shares the same ...
... name?
... identification marks?
What does the Mishnah rule in a case where a man on his deathbed tells his son that one Sh'tar among his Sh'tarei-Chov has been paid but he cannot remember which one?
What if there are two Sh'taros that bear the name of the same debtor?
18)
Consequently, if they want to lend each other money or if someone wants to lend them - they must add their grandfather's name.
If...
... their grandfathers too, shares the same name - then they insert identification marks (such as red-head, tall, or short).
... they also share the same identification marks - they add Kohen (or Levi) if this is applicable (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
In a case where a man on his deathbed (Tos. Yom-Tov) tells his son that one Sh'tar among his Sh'tarei-Chov has been paid (See Tos. Yom-Tov) but he cannot remember which one - then all his debtors' Sh'taros are negated.
If there are two Sh'taros that bear the name of the same debtor - then the son can only claim with the smaller of the two Sh'taros.
19)
On what condition is a creditor allowed to claim from the Areiv (the guarantor?
When can he go to him first if he pleases?
19)
A creditor is allowed to claim from the Areiv (the guarantor only - if he has already taken the debtor to Beis-Din and they have declared him Chayav to pay.
He can go to him first if he pleases - should he initially stipulate this at the outset.
20)
What does Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel say about claming from the Areiv first assuming the Loveh...
... has property with which to pay?
... does not have property?
We amend the Mishnah however, in that the Tana Kama actually agrees with that. On what condition then does he argue withy Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and permit the creditor to claim immediately from the Areiv even if the debtor is able to pay according to him?
What is the definition of ...
... an Areiv?
... an Areiv Kablan
What does Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel then say?
Like whom is the Halachah?
20)
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds that one cannot claim first from the Areiv, irrespective of whether the Loveh ...
... has property or ...
.... whether he doen't.
We amend the Mishnah however, in that the Tana Kama actually agrees with that. According to him, the creditor can claim immediately from the Areiv even if the debtor is able to pay - there where the Areiv is an Areiv Kablan.
The definition of ...
... an 'Areiv' is - one who says 'Lend him the money and I will be an Areiv'.
... an Areiv Kablan is - one who says 'Lend him the money and I will pay'.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel then says that - if the debtor is able to pay, one cannot claim from the Areiv first even if he is an Areiv Kablan.
The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
21)
What does Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel also say about a case where someone undertakes to be an Areiv to pay a woman's Kesubah where her husband possesses no property, and where he subsequently comes to divorce her?
What is the significance of a Neder al Da'as Rabim?
Why is that?
21)
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel also (See Tos. Yom-Tov) says that, in a case where someone undertakes to be an Areiv to pay a woman's Kesubah where her husband possesses no property, and where he subsequently comes to divorce her - he (the husband) is obligated to make a Neder al Da'as Rabim (depending on the consent of the community) ...
... which is not subject to nullification, that he will not have any benefit from his ex-wife ...
... because we suspect that he is only divorcing her in order to share with her the Kesubah that she will then claim from the Areiv.
22)
The Din is however, that the Areiv of a Kesubah is not Chayav to pay, even if the husband is unable to pay. Why is that?
When is even the Areiv of a Kesubah Chayav (provided the husband abides by the above-mentioned condition)?
Why is that?
What if his son is able to pay?
22)
The Din is however, that the Areiv of a Kesubah is not obligated to pay, even if the husband is unable to pay - since he accepts the Arvus because he feels he is doing a Mitzvah, but does not genuinely obligate himself.
Even the Areiv of a Kesubah is Chayav however (provided the husband abides by the above-mentioned condition) - if it is on behalf of his son who is getting married ...
... because a man tends to obligate himself if it is on behalf of his son.
... even there where his son is able to pay himself.
Mishnah 8
23)
What distinction does the Mishnah draw between someone who lends money with a Sh'tar and someone who lends only with witnesses?
What does claiming from Meshubadim entail?
In the former case, based on which principle may the creditor claim from Nechasim even if they are not inserted in the Sh'tar?
What if he gives him a sign I.O.U.?
Why is that?
23)
The Mishnah rules that someone who lends money with a Sh'tar - has the right to claim from Meshuba'dim (See Tos. Yom-Tov), whereas someone who lends only with witnesses - does not.
'Claiming from Meshubadim' entails - claiming from property that the debtor sold after the debt took place.
In the former case, the creditor may claim from Nechasim even if they are not inserted in the Sh'tar based on the principle - 'Acharayus Ta'us Sofer Hu' (failure to insert Acharyus is merely an error on the part of the Sofer).
A signed I.O.U. - has the Din of a Milveh al-Peh (an oral debt) ...
... because, since there are no witnesses, the loan has no Kol (people do not know about it and potential purchasers have no way of protecting themselves against creditors [See Tos. Yom-Tov in a.).
24)
What does the Tana say about where the Areiv's obligation appears on the Sh'tar after the witnesses' signature?
Why is that?
24)
The Tana rules that if the Areiv's obligation appears after the witnesses' signature - the creditor is only permitted to claim from b'nei Chorin (but not from Meshuba'dim) ...
... because, since the witnesses did not sign on the Arvus, there is no Kol (See 24e).
25)
When Rebbi Yishmael ...
... issued the current ruling, what did ben Azai counter?
... asked him why, what was his response?
To what did he compare it?
How does ben Azai then define an Arvus that is valid?
25)
When Rebbi Yishmael ...
... issued the current ruling ben Azai countered that - in fact the creditor cannot claim from the Areiv's b'nei Chorin either.
... asked him why - his response was that the creditor issued the loan independently, and not on account of the Arvus (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
And he compared it to Levi who finds Reuven strangling Shimon in the street (to force him to pay his debt), and who offers to pay the debt that Shimon owes Reuven (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Harei ha'Chonek').
ben Azai therefore defines an Arvus that is valid - as one where the Malveh only lends the Loveh because the Areiv initially took responsibility for the loan.
26)
In response to ben Azai's ruling, what did Rebbi Yishmael declare with regard to anyone who wants to ...
... become wise?
... study Dinei Mamonos?
What reason did he give for the former statement?
Like whom is the Halachah?
What distinction does the Halachah draw between an Areiv who obligates himself before the creditor has handed over the money to the debtor and one who obligates himself afterwards?
What if the latter does not make a Kinyan?
26)
In response to ben Azai's ruling, Rebbi Yishmael declared that whoever wants to ...
... become wise - should study the Dinim of Mamonos.
... study Dinei Mamonos - should study under ben Azai.
The reason that he gave for the former statement was that - there is no greater area of Torah-study that is greater than them, since they are like a fountain that constantly flows.
Nevertheless, the Halachah is - like Rebbi Yishmael.
According to the Halachah, an Areiv who obligates himself before the creditor has handed over the money to the debtor - does not require a Kinyan, whereas one who obligates himself afterwards - does ...
... otherwise, he is not Chayav.
***** Salik Maseches Bava Basra *****
