(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Bava Kama 69


(a) In a Mishnah in Ma'aser Sheini, the Tana describes how they used to mark certain areas with different markings to warn people to keep away.
Why did they mark ...
  1. ... a Kerem Revai by surrounding it with clods of earth?
  2. ... a Kerem of Orlah by surrounding it with broken pieces of tiles?
  3. ... a grave by surrounding it with lime?
(b) What did they do with the lime before application?

(c) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel restricts these practices to the Sh'mitah year. Why is that?

(d) What did the Tzenu'in used to do?

(a) Why does this S'tam Mishnah pose a Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan?

(b) On what grounds do we refute the answer that the author of the Mishnah is Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, in which case it is no longer a S'tam Mishnah, but a minority opinion?

(c) How many times in Shas is the Halachah not like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel throughout Shas?

(d) How do we initially amend the Mishnah in order to accommodate Rebbi Yochanan?

(a) According to Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, the owner would declare Hefker each morning 'Kol she'Yilketu' (all Leket that the poor would collect in the course of the day).
Why was this necessary? Surely, all Leket is Hefker anyway?

(b) What does Rebbi Dosa say?

(c) What did Rebbi Yochanan say about the Tzenu'in and Rebbi Dosa that refutes our amendment of the Mishnah in Ma'aser Sheini?

(d) We answer that the Beraisa too, needs to be amended, and that we must switch the opinions of Rebbi Dosa and Rebbi Yehudah (in which case Rebbi Dosa and the Tzenu'in both hold 'Kol she'Yilketu' [which is the equivalent of 'Kol ha'Mislaket']).
On what grounds do we query this answer?

(a) We reply that in any event we are forced to switch the opinions of Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Dosa, because the stated opinion of Rebbi Yehudah with regard to 'Bereirah' creates a problem with another statement of his in another Beraisa.
What does Rebbi Yehudah hold here (by Leket) regarding 'Bereirah'?

(b) Rebbi Meir holds that if someone buys wine from a Kuti late on Friday afternoon, he declares Terumah, Ma'aser and Ma'aser Sheini in advance of the actual separation.
But will it not be a matter of Bereirah when he later separates them?

(c) How much must the owner actually separate from a hundred Lugin of wine ...

  1. ... for Terumah?
  2. ... for Ma'aser Rishon?
  3. ... for Ma'aser Sheini?
(d) What do Rebbi Yehudah, Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi Shimon say? To what reasoning do we currently attribute this?
Answers to questions



(a) We may have now resolved Rebbi Yehudah's statements, having concluded that he holds 'Ein Bereirah'. But we are still faced with a contradiction in Rebbi Yochanan (in whose opinion both the Tzenu'in and Rebbi Dosa hold 'Yesh Bereirah').
What did Rav Asi say in his name regarding brothers who divided their deceased father's property?

(b) So how do we finally conclude in Rebbi Yochanan with regard to 'Kol ha'Nilkat/Mislaket'?

(c) But if the Tzenu'in (who say 'Kol ha'Mislaket') hold 'Yesh Bereirah', how can Rebbi Yochanan hold otherwise (as we ascertained earlier)?

(a) How does Rebbi Yochanan extrapolate from our Mishnah 'Ein ha'Gonev Achar ha'Ganav Meshalem Tashlumei Kefel' that the owner cannot declare Hekdesh an article over which he has no jurisdiction?

(b) And how do we reconcile Rebbi Yehudah (whose initial statement of 'Kol she'Yilketu' we have reinstated) with his opinion in the Beraisa in D'mai, where he forbids the owner to declare Ma'aser on Erev Shabbos and to Ma'aser it on Shabbos after he has drunk part of it? If he holds 'Yesh Bereirah', then why does he forbid it?

(c) How does Rebbi Yochanan extrapolate the opinion of our S'tam Mishnah (rather than the S'tam Mishnah of Tzenu'in) from the Pasuk "ve'Ish Ki Yakdish es Beiso Kodesh"?

(a) Abaye points out that, had Rebbi Yochanan not equated the opinion of the Tzenu'in with that of Rebbi Dosa, he would have said that Rebbi Dosa (who talks about the poor collecting Leket), disagrees with the Tzenu'in (who talk about a Ganav picking fruit from a Kerem Revai).
Why is that?

(b) According to him, would the Tzenu'in agree with Rebbi Dosa?

(a) In similar style, Rava points out that, were it not for Rebbi Yochanan's statement, he would have established the Tzenu'in like Rebbi Meir, who holds 'Ma'aser Mamon Gavohah Hu'.
What do we nevertheless learn from the Pasuk in Bechukosai "ve'Im Yig'al Ish mi'Ma'asro"?

(b) How does Rava then connect the Tzenu'in with Rebbi Meir via the Pasuk in Kedoshim (in connection with Neta Revai) "Kodesh Hilulim"?

(c) And what would the Tzenu'in then hold in the case of Rebbi Dosa ('Kol ha'Nilkat)?

(d) Rebbi Yochanan therefore informs us that this is not the case, but that 'Tzenu'in ve'Rebbi Dosa Amru Davar Echad'.
What are the ramifications of his statement?

9) And in similar style again, Ravina states that, if not for Rebbi Yochanan, he would have established the author of the Beraisa of Tzenu'in as Rebbi Dosa.
What would he have gained by doing so?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,