Explanation: This was [next to] the very forest of the Nochri officer. He did not transgress at all. Therefore, he cursed.

Explanation (Rashi): He received [the riverfront property] from the king through paying the tax, like Rashi explained.

Support: This is why it says "he made Chazakah", and not "he bought", like we say below "he bought for 200", "he bought from a Nochri."

Explanation: Similarly, the case below of one who made Chazakah between brothers, R. Tam explains that he made Chazakah, for the land was Hefker, and he received it from the king through paying the tax. We do not remove him;

According to Rav Nachman, only in the case of between brothers, we remove him, for he did too improperly to make Chazakah between brothers;

However, due to Metzranus (a neighbor's rights to buy land next to his property before others), we do not remove him, for "v'Asisa ha'Yashar veha'Tov" does not apply, since [the neighbors] could have received from the king, and they were not concerned to do so.

Distinction: However, regarding a sale, all agree that Dina d'Bar Meitzra applies. The neighbor was not responsible to think that the owner wanted to sell.

Neharde'ei hold that even so, "v'Asisa ha'Yashar veha'Tov" applies (when one received from the king, the neighbor may buy it from him).

Support: Now it is fine that Neharde'ei say in the name of Rav Nachman in our Sugya "Ona'ah does not apply to land" refers to Metzranus, like is proven in Kesuvos (99b);

Rava said regarding a Shali'ach who erred "the master (Rav Nachman) taught that Ona'ah does not apply to land!" [Rav Nachman said so here] regarding Metzranus, in which [the buyer] is like a Shali'ach, for he will not keep the purchase.

We need not say a poor answer, like Rashi did, that Rav Nachman disagrees with Dina d'Bar Meitzra.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): We remove him, for the first one acquired from the king.

Rebuttal (and Explanation #2): We remove one who comes to make Chazakah l'Chatchilah, for since the Persians write.... We are concerned lest he come to make Chazakah up to inside the river, like the king writes to him, and he will inhibit the passage of boats and their entrance to the harbor;

Due to this we fine him to leave the entire riverfront, even what is outside the river.

Suggestion: All of these are for the needs of orphans.

Rejection: This would imply that for other needs of orphans, we do not sell without auction, like the cases mentioned in Gitin (52a) "we sell their fields to buy a Megilah, Tzitzis and Shofar..."

If so, in Erchin (22a), when we challenge Rav Asi, who said that we do not collect [from orphans' property unless Ribis is accumulating], from the Mishnah of "the auction of orphans' [property] is 30 days, and we announce morning and evening..."

We should establish it for matters of orphans, which need announcement! Rather, surely all matters of orphans do not need announcement;

Our Sugya discusses head tax, food and burial of the wife and daughters. (Other needs of the wife and daughters require announcement.)

Question: Obviously, we sell for burial without announcement. Should we leave the Mes in the wasteheap all the days of announcement?!

Answer #1: If they borrowed for the needs of burial, we sell without announcement to repay.

Answer #2: One might have thought that we [borrow immediately, and] take a security from orphans' property until they announce.

Explanation: This is only if a Yisrael wanted to pay as much money as the Nochri paid.

Explanation: This discusses who has precedence, when both of them are neighbors. The city neighbor is a neighbor from the side of the city. He has a field in back of his house, next to this [field for sale];

The field neighbor has a field far from the city, next to this [field for sale].

Explanation: The house is built on land. The owner of the land can stop [the owner of the house] from selling the wood and rocks to anyone other than him;

However, if a house is by a house or land not destined for planting, Dina d'Bar Meitzra does not apply;

There, the reason below, to enter a furrow (in between the barrier between the two fields) does not apply.

Limitation: "Ha'Yashar veha'Tov" applies to only to a field for seeding, so one can plow it at once. Also R. Tam explained so in a Teshuvah that begins "we pursued all angles, and we did not find the law of Metzranus regarding houses."