REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Metzia 3
(a) If Reuven and Shimon deposit money by Levi, one of them deposits one
Manah, the other, two, and each one then claims that the two is his, the
Tana Kama in the Mishnah in ha'Mafkid rules that each one takes a Manah and
the third Manah is put away until Eliyahu comes.
What does Rebbi Yossi
(b) What makes us think that the author of our Mishnah cannot be Rebbi
(c) Why is this not a problem according to the Rabbanan, who, when all's
said and done, require the third Manah (over which they are arguing), to be
(a) According to Rebbi Yossi however, who holds that all three Manah are put
away until Eliyahu comes (and not divided), even though one Manah definitely
belongs to Reuven and one, to Shimon, then here, where the Talis might
belong either to one or to the other, it should certainly be put away (and
How do we nevertheless reconcile Rebbi Yossi with our
(b) Alternatively, we try to answer that the K'nas is applicable in the case
of the Pikadon, it is not applicable in the case of Metzi'ah, because there
is nothing with which to force the hand of the one who is lying.
grounds do we refute this answer?
(c) What problem do we now have with the case of 'Chenvani al Pinkaso',
where according to both the Rabbanan and Rebbi Yossi, both the worker and
the storekeeper claim their dues from the Balabos (according to one with a
Shevu'ah, according to the other, without one)?
(d) On what basis do they both agree that in that case, we cannot say 'Yehei
Munach ad she'Yavo Eliyahu'?
(a) What does Rebbi Chiya in a Beraisa, rule in a case where Shimon denies
the Manah that Reuven claims from him, but witnesses testify that he owes
him fifty Zuz?
(b) What is the reasoning behind this ruling?
(c) How does he prove it from our Mishnah? What is 'Anan Sahadi'?
(a) Initially, we think that the defendant's own admission is more reason to
obligate him to swear than witnesses, because of Rabah.
Rabah, why would we hesitate to obligate a 'Modeh be'Miktzas' (someone who
admits to half the claim) from a Shevu'ah?
(b) Why does the Torah not, in fact, consider this a 'Migu'?
(c) If he really then wants to admit to the entire claim, as Rabah goes on
to say, why doesn't he?
(d) Why does Rabah need to add that he now wants to admit to the entire
(a) What do we initially set out to prove from Rabah regarding Rebbi Chiya's
Din of Hoda'as Eidim?
Answers to questions
(b) How do we actually prove it?
(a) So Rebbi Chiya learns that Hoda'as Eidim obligates a Shevu'ah with a
'Kal va'Chomer' from Hoda'as Piv.
What is the 'Kal va'Chomer'?
(b) What is the Halachah regarding a 'Ho'da'as Ba'al-Din' (someone who
admits that he owes money), and how does that create a Pircha on the 'Kal
(c) If Rebbi Chiya cannot learn the 'Kal va'Chomer from Hoda'as Piv of
Mamon, then from where does he learn it? What do we learn from the Pasuk
"Asher Yarshi'un Elohim"?
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra "*ve'Hisvadah* Asher Chata,
(b) Then why is this not a Pircha on Rebbi Chiya?
(c) This Machlokes is based on a Mishnah in K'riysus, where the Chachamim
exempt someone from a Chatas if witnesses testify that he ate Cheilev
On what basis does Rebbi Meir obligate him?
(d) On what grounds do the Chachamim disagree with him?
(a) We cannot ask on the 'Kal va'Chomer from Asham, because Asham too, is a
Korban (and Rebbi Chiya holds like Rebbi Meir, as we just explained).
Pircha do we then ask from the Chomesh that accompanies an Asham Gezeilos?
(b) How do we refute this Pircha too?
(a) We finally refute the previous version of the 'Kal va'Chomer' on the
grounds that 'Hakchashah and Hazamah apply to Eidim but not to Piv, and that
is the edge that Piv has over Eidim.
Answers to questions
Why should Hakchashah and Hazamah not
apply to Piv?
(b) So we switch the 'Kal va'Chomer' from Piv to Eid Echad.
What is now
the 'Kal va'Chomer'?
(c) What Pircha do we ask on this? What basic distinction differentiates
between the testimony of one witness and that of two witnesses?