Gemara Markings Daf Yomi
Bava Metzia 14b, 15a
You dull it on the bays, five lines down, at the itmar. So itmar. [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] Let's see if Bob sells a field to Carl, and it turns out that it was ever Bob's to sell. He basically had stolen it, or when someone misrepresented himself as the owner of it. And now, obviously, the rightful owner goes and takes it away from Carl. Well, that's great, but how does Carl get compensated for what he paid Bob? [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] And one line letter is Schmull, who we also circled. [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] Carl is entitled to compensation for the money he paid, as well as if he put in improvements. He would also get compensated for that. Schmull disagrees, though. Schmull, who we circled on our, [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] Carl is certainly entitled to the money he paid for the field, which was not really a field to be sold in, but it gets that back. But the Schmull, he does not get compensated for the extra improvements he put into the field. That's the [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] How about this? I guess within Schmull, let's say the deal was much more specific. [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] When Bob sold his field to Carl, he specifically said to him that, listen, if you get that field seized away from you, I will compensate you for whatever improvements you put into it, as well, then what do we say? [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] Is the time, [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] The original Schmull is because, well, like the guy when he sold it never spoke that, that he would compensate for the improvements. However, [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] He said it outright. And therefore, Carl would be entitled to compensation for whatever improvements he put in. Or maybe there's another issue here going on. Oh, Dilma B, time at the Schmull. The reason of Schmull is, at the end of the day, Bob didn't own this field at all. So it's almost like when Carl gave him the cash payment for the field, it was almost like a loan. So let's say he paid $10,000 for it, put $1,000 in improvements. If Bob were to give Carl back now, let's say $11,000, so it kind of looks like Carl paid Bob $10,000, and then Bob's paying back $11,000 at a later date, came into Lacely since Bob never really had the field. Carca, meaning like the land, MEXI caribis it, sort of looks like Rubis then. Therefore, oh no, Carl paid $10,000 for it. He gets $10,000 back. Cannot get more 'cause it looks like Rubis. That was the question they asked of Raphuna. Amarlay, or Amarlahoo, Raphuna responded to them in, yes, Lav, no. Basically, Rafa Biade was literally like loose in his hands. He didn't have clarity on this issue, whether it's a potential looking like Rubis issue or not. Kama, itmar, so the discussion continues. Ammar Ravnachman, I know I know of nachmin, Ammar Schmuel. And I know I know nachmin Schmuel, so we're gonna be going along with the Schmuel approach. Mosey Hlais, now this is Ravnachman, seemingly with some more clarity on this, that the car would be entitled to get his money back, but Schvach, a compensation for the improvements he put in, which got seized away, Ayn Loy, and that's even if connector Alpha Pisha Pure, Shai Sashvah, even when Bob sold it to me, he said, "Hey, listen, don't worry, Carl, "put in improvements. "If it gets seized away from you, "I'll compensate you for the price you paid for it to me "and all of your improvements." Now, my time on, what's the reason? Why would Carl not be entitled to the compensation for the improvements he put in? Kva de Karka, Ayn Loy, well, it's like we had said above, and apparently this was clear to Ravnachman, since he never had the land, Bob, that is, originally, Skarma Aisav, I made Vinayetel. It's basically Ribes-like, and we stay very far away from anything that is even the appearance of Ribes, period. Aceve, I put a triangle on this Aceve, this is gonna be Ravah, asking a question of Nachman, and let's see, about 10 lines before, maybe eight lines before the end of the Amwood, the first word align is Triz, and the middle line is a tashmai, but a triangle on that tashmai. We'll have a series of, series of two, today's sources and the analysis of them, which will seemingly be difficult for Shmoop. So it says the first Aceve, it takes about six lines to develop the question. I put a long question marking in the margin until first of the line is Karka's, and here's the question is asked by Ravat Ravnachman, Aceve Ravat Ravnachman. So it brings a today's source, Masekha's Gittin, almost three lines, and the Tenic source says as follows, if you have to, for whatever reason, seize away from somebody, either compensation or land or things, the question is always gonna be whether you can take it only from their actual property they have right now, even things that might have a lean on it, meaning they had sold them earlier. So it says the Tenic source, and then we'll see in three things on the list over here. Number one, la achilas perais. Number two, le schwach karkaus, I squiggled in the line schwach karkaus, and number three, le muzzling hai sha vah haa ba nayce, if for whatever reason there needs to be, money seized away to compensate for somebody, apparently who ate peris that they shouldn't have, or for improvements that were put into land, or for food support, for a married woman and her daughters, that only can come from the chasim, excuse me, ain mitzian, from the chasim shubad, and it can only come from the chasim shubad, like actual assets, not assets that had a lean on it and previously had been sold to somebody else, they cannot come from the chasim shubad, it may tikkun hai lum, because it's just much better for the world if people, see, if people think that when they purchase something, there's like a hundred and one different reasons why they get seized away, they will be very unlikely to purchase things, 'cause there's no way they can protect themselves, it's like open-ended possibility of getting the thing you just purchased seized away from you, and therefore only from the chasim been a hard enough from the chubad, and that's the duke, the kumwara makes me, meshabdi, hu de loy mafkinan, so from the chubad property you can't take, and we'll focus for the shvakkarka, 'cause apparently there's some issue where someone has to be compensated for the improvements they put into the land, obviously if you put improvements to the land and still has the land, he's not gonna compensate it, here must've been seized away, and the duke from a meshubad, and we can't collect from, but, and I dot underland the next four words, habibne hai rin, mafkinan, you can seize away from bne hai rin, apparently for shvakkarka, huh, now why are you seizing away from somebody for shvakkarka from bne hai rin? The katani mia, one of the three cases was, just focus our attention, and put the right angles in for two words, le shvakkarkaies. Okay, so again, the question is, why are you seizing away from somebody to compensate for shvakkarka from bne hai rin? Is it not, do we not say, and this is where the question comes in on shmuel, my love belay kyak, me, ghazlan, so somebody purchased a property from a ghazlan, put improvements in it, get seized away, what are you taking away from the shvakk apparently, from a ghazlan, that would be a question on shmuel, who says that, no, there's no shvak, let's compensate when it comes to a ghazlan, 'cause it looks like Rippus. Well, the Gamara says, that would be a question on shmuel, if we were talking about a ghazlan in that case, case two, but we're not low, comma, rather we're talking about a balchayv. So you had a balchayv of al, who seized the property along with the shvakk away from bill, because of money that was owed to him from al, and nothing to do with something that was stolen, it's simply money that had been owed, that like a loan that was defaulted on. Well, as to the Gamara, Iba balchayv, you're trying to tell me it's a balchayv in the above Brice, how do you fit that into a marecia? The number one case where it said, ain weid sien la achilas peros. Now, achilas peros, where's there any commsage for achilas peros, if we're talking about a balchayv, simply someone who took a loan, not someone who purchased the property, but just a loan, balchayv, meis le paris. Balchayv is not entitled to the peros, question mark, comma connector, of how marshmouluishmoul himself would said, balchayv is definitely entitled, goves as shvakk, he gets the improvements that might have been made to the field, that's the shvakk in, but the peros, lo, he doesn't get the peros on top of that, el up sheeta, rather it's gotta be that the first of the three cases in the Brice about seven lines ago, is talking about if there's peros, that there's a goves of a niggaselle, someone who stole it, someone who has stolen from, and there is a compensation that's necessary for peros, and umide ratio, since case one is big, goes of a niggaselle, the question seems to return, because it must be that safeo, which is the second case, which is the shvakk kar koi, it's nami beguys of a niggaselle. Seems like the question is still on shmoul, and the good more it turns around says no, not necessarily, case one could be media area, does the fact that case one is talking about, it can only be in a case of a gazan, shed any light on case two, media area, hakadis vakadis, the case one is a case of a gazan, the ha in case two, by the shvakk kar koi, is kadis by a bahlchreiv. The question on that is that we have a Brice that seems to indicate that that's not the case, the ha loitani hakui, we have a Brice that was taught in, as like a comment of the mission that we had, 10 lines ago quoted from Bessach's Giten, it's a sein-moitzin, and it's said like this, it goes for about three and a half lines, I boxed it off, and it says like this, we had said the number two case was for shvakk kar koi, so you can't seize away for shvakk koi, it's from the kazimeshu baadim, 'cause of Tukon Island. So the Brice wants a little bit more explanation, the shvakk koi is katzad, and very interesting, let's see the example that is given, is it talking about a bahlchreiv case, or is it talking about a ghazulan case, so what's the way the Brice itself explains it? Hareshe ghazal, I double underline the word ghazal, apparently the case is where there was a fields, ghazal sadun kehavera, field stolen from someone else, brihi yojsen mitachas jodai, and it's being seized away, kishihu, gawi vaidad underline kishu, gawi vah, when he collects, apparently for some sort of compensation, gawi vah esa karen, whatever the principle cost of it was, from nakhazimishubadim, and the shvakk, ice gwiggleen rein the shvakk, gagumim nakhazimine karen. Okay, so there's a limitation for the shvakk, what it can be seized from. That's the end of the snake source connector now. Heiki dummy, it's really difficult to understand the Brice as the way it is, because the Brice presented a case where there was a field that was stolen, well, it's like it said, which is a stolen field, gazlan miman gawi. Well, in a second, if somebody steals a field and gets a seized away from him, that person's not getting any sort of compensation, he had stolen it. Rather, it must be that there's more going on in the above today's source. El alafkugain shagaz al-sadamkhaveray, it's a case where there was a person who stole a field from someone else. Bob stole a field from Al, Umaq al-Aqar, and then Bob turned around and sold it to Carl, vihishbihan, Carl improved it. Okay, so that's the snake source, and that is a bit difficult for, I guess, Umaq al-Amershmul Amalay, I assume it's Umaq al-Aqar been saying back to Rava, that's the back and forth, as we had started at the Triangle about 17 lines ago. Once you have to add information to the above Brice, love tehruzhi kammitarthas, did you not have to revise the Brice, like giving your own sort of shot? Well, if that's the case, triznami, vibbal hai, you could also change, or maybe also understand that when it said, shagaz al, as explained in this source, is really not shagaz, but rather sha, laqah. Oh, tashmah, back to the drawing board, another today's source, which we're going to have, and it's gonna be a question on Ravaq al-Amershmul the second one, so tashmah. This, I believe, is another Brice, giving clarity to the Tank source we had about 18 lines ago. The one that listed off the three categories of chiles perish, vakar, chiles, mozzan, yishabanas, and where we said, for achiles peros, you cannot see this away from the Chassamishu button. So, says this Brice, which is also about three and a half lines, I box it off. Laqilas peros quesad, right? Since the case is dealing with peros, it, like, by definition, cannot be talking about alqahive. It's gotta be, not alqahive. So, where is the, how does that play out? What would be the case for alqilas peros with his compensation issue? Well, Horatia Ghazal, again, I squiggle underline the word Ghazal. Ghazal said mikha veyre. Bob stole a field from Al. Varei yojzimitarhasiad, and apparently, he's getting it seized away from him. Kishu, who gave a dada underline kushu, gave a, it seems like, almost parallel, identical to the previous Brice. So, when he collects, gova esa karen mina chassamishu button. Now, there's no schwach over here, but there is the peros. Ooh, peros. Go mina chassam mina chei red. Okay. Well, similar to what we did, six, seven lines ago, we need to understand that Brice, which is talking about the schwach our coins. Same thing, when it comes down to, "Let's peros, hehi, dummy." It cannot be, like the previous snake source, literally, like it said, even in my kid take a tani, that there's only two people here. There's Alan Bob, Alan to feel Bob stole it. Bob had it seized away from him. Well, Bob's not going anywhere from compensation. That was the stolen field he had seized away from him. And therefore, Ghazla, nimangavi, who exactly is he collecting from, there's gotta be something else, some other, maybe like a third party over here. Elalav, there is. Kishu, gazla, sate mikha veyre, right. Bob stole a field from Al. Umaq al-Aqah, and then turned around and sold it to Carl, veyish bikha, and he improved it. And what do we see? This is a question under Dachshamul, because apparently there is going to be a collection, compensation, not only for the price of the field, but also for the Aqilaz peros. Wouldn't that be a problem of maybe looking like Ribes? Well, then we have three ways to answer this. I'm a Reva, I circled Reva, and I put a number one in the margin, and the bottom line is Rababaravuna, I circled Rababaravuna, and put a number two in the margin, and six lines down on Tessvavamadalaf, last term in the line is Ravashya, I circled Revashya, put a number three in the margin. So we're gonna have three approaches to deal with this. As to why it's not a question under Dachshamul. So I'm our Reva, Hakaamayaskinan, what is the case over here? Clearly, if somebody is collecting, the case must be he going Shagazal, Sada Nihavere. You have Babu Stolafield from Al. Let's, I believe the next two words, we'll put in parentheses, the grub prefers not to read them based on the Rabab. So you have a person, Bab's Stolafield from Al, the Aqilazah peros, and now Bab consumed the peros, and also, I guess he's a very destructive guy, he Ha'far by Barushikumaras, he dug all sorts of holes and ditches, thereby lessening the value of the land. So, Bhandiksal, underlying Bhandiksal, Ligweis, the Nigsal, the one I have this field stolen away from, he comes to collect, Karen, the actual value of the field, he can go of Mihasbeshbadam. Now why doesn't he just take the field? Because the field he's taking is worth less, because of these pits and ditches that were dug. So the additional Karen, he would need to compensate for what the value of the field was at the time, was stolen, can come from Mihasbeshbadam. Bhandiksal, Ligweis, peros, if he wants to collect though the peros, go of Mihasbeshbanehairan, only from Mihasbeshbanehairan of Bab fief. Let's see, Rashi on the bottom line, Ammar Rava. Rashi explains that when it says, towards the right angles, Kishu Hu Gueva, that which we dot underlined, in the bracelet, seven lines before the end of the page, what does it mean when he comes to collect? We're not talking about a third party, there's no Carl, it's only Al and Bob. Lava billikayaka, Ammar, and I underlined three words, the Bishaloy makhreskinen. We're talking about where Bob never sold it. Bob simply stole it and now they're, we're dealing with the issues that result from that. When it says, three words and right angles, and the above bracelet. The Gueva's a Karen de Karmar, and then when we collect the Karen, that's the nigsal. Now one second, why would the person have to feel stolen away from having to collect Karen, doesn't he just get to feel back? Veeem timear, Karen am I going? (speaking in foreign language) Harikar kalafana, he got to feel stolen from letting him take the field back. Yeah, that's if the field was in the same state it was when it was stolen. However, since it had been semi-destroyed, since then you're going to hover over, (speaking in foreign language) or barrows, de afra sami shavye, you had lessened its value. That's the Rava approach. Rava barafuna, who he had circled, and he's a second approach. Ammar, the case is, different case. (speaking in foreign language) It was seized away, but it was seized away by Gentile tough guys, and they seized it away from the Ghazlan. And now there's going to be the nigsal who had to stolen away from him, is going to want compensation from the Ghazlan. So bar, nigsal underline bar nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, the Karen, why didn't he just give the field back? Well, he doesn't have the field back to get him, because he had been stolen away by these skitter and tug, the Gentile tough guys. Therefore, he's certainly entitled to a compensation, how that is from Bob. Gova min hahasim mis chubadim, you can get from Bob's even mischubad properties. Bar nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, the pairies, gova, he's limited to being able to collect how that is from Bob's nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, nigsal, nigsal. Okay, so we had two different approaches. Rava and Rava Barafuna. Why did each one not want to say like the other? Rava lei amar karava barafuna, why? Because the teneic source had said, and I put this in right angles, harehi yyatsa mitahas yadei. Behold, it is being seized away or taken away from him. That does not sound like Gentiles came and seized it away. Now he's getting a conversation rather, but Dina Mashman sounds like it's going through a proper Jewish court system. Okay, comma, why did Rava Barafuna lei amar karava, he didn't want to say like the Rava approach 'cause he had another issue. When it says in the teneic source, same five words, quote, harehi yatsa mitahas yadei, when it says, while it's being seized away from him, yeah, however, that seems to imply, ba ein, like ba ein Mashman. The land itself is being taken away, whereas Rava's explanation implied it was, it was the monetary equivalent. A third approach to that this is rava ashi. We saw the rava ashi, he's the number three. Rava ashi amar is a much different approach. His understanding is the Bryce's teaching two independent rulings, two specific, separate people are coming to make the claims. Let's start in katani, ke goin. And he explains his follow. Shagasasasasasasasasasasasasasasasasasa bei rebabs stole a field from Al, Malaya Pei Reis, and it was filled with Pei Reis. Vahakalasas Pei Reis, Bob consumed the Pei Reis, and then he turned around, a real character here, Bob, Umachar Esasada. And he then sold the field to someone else. Okay, now there's gonna be people who need to be compensated here. Balaikea, the guy who bought the field, who turns out it wasn't really the field that he bought, he couldn't buy it, it wasn't the sellers to sell, it wasn't Bob's to sell to Carl. When Carl comes, Ligwe's Karen to collect the basic price he paid for the field, they're going to be in a cluster meshu button. He can certainly collect from the cluster meshu button above Bob. Bahnigzal, the original field owner, who he's got his field back, but it was previously filled with Peiros, now there's no Peiros, so he needs to get compensated for the Peiros, Bahnigzal. I don't mind about Nigzal, Ligwe's Peiros, Gove, Menechossim, Benechairin. And therefore, we're able to explain the cases being both Bideena, like properly seized away, and Beneena, where it is still there. Okay, now back to the first two approaches, the Rava and Rava Barafuna approaches, Bene the Rava and the Rava Barafuna, Milva Al Peh, who, isn't it essentially a case of a Milva Al Peh, 'cause the guy who stole the field never really had it, and Milva Al Peh, ain't it not even the cluster meshu button? So how could you say that there's being collect from the cluster meshu button? Like, by definition, don't we get protection to purchasers of land that they can't have people see things away from them, if it was just some sort of oral agreement? So the Camera Explains, how come am I asking none? Kesha Amad Bideen, it's where the Gazlan had already had a case go through court. The Hudders of it and then turned around after the court case and sold the property. Well, one second asking me, Ihakhi, if there's already been a court case, Pehreus Nami, you should be able to collect from meshu button, not only for the actual field, but for the Paris as well. Well, no, because the court case that had happened was limited. There was a court case, Kesha Amad Bideen, Alat Keren, for the Ikhir Valley of the field itself, however, there never was a court case like Amad Bideen, Al-Hapehreus. Well, says that, Gammar, that's quite convenient, that there was a court case for one part, but not the other, Amai Paska. Like, why would it be like that? Well, it's just because, that's probably the way it usually is, Stama de Milza, let's say someone has a field stolen away from him, and there's also a Pehreus issue. So if there's one issue you wanna deal with in court, it's to get the field back. Kitava Inish, if I'm gonna call somebody else to court, I'm going to sue them, they have to come to court. Karna Katavabirash, the first thing I'll deal with is the Ikhir issue, which is the field. And then, as a secondary issue, maybe deal with the Pehreus. The Gammar, I'll say, question now, the question takes about six of the lines to develop, and it's a question on Shmool. We go back to what we had said on Yodhala Damad Bayes, I believe maybe put an arrow in over there when Ravnachman Amr Shmool had said that he's entitled to Mose, but compensation for the improvements he doesn't get, because it kind of looks like a ribous issue. Ask the Gammar now, if it's ever Shmool, really? Shmool holds that are like, (speaks in foreign language) If somebody purchased something from a person, it turns out that it actually was stolen. (speaks in foreign language) is not entitled to a Shmool compensation? (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) Shmool had told a famous sofa at the time, so from those times we were responsible for writing up all sorts of documentation for people, and Shmool had told him as the way to deal with customers, who come in to have him write a start, Imlech, coordinate with him, check with them, get permission from them, Uxov, and write into the documents that you're writing. Shufra, Shvaha, Upiri. Shufra would be any, like, betterments. Shvaha, that's the one that's important for us, is any improvements that the purchaser might put in, as well as peros. Now, what are we talking about over here? Where is there gonna be a peros compensation that's possibly necessary? Be'mai, colon. (speaks in foreign language) If we're something talking about money that's lent from Al-Tabaab, me, Islay, Pire, there's no peros in that standard type of case. (speaks in foreign language) I don't know much about the name of the game, but (speaks in foreign language) that (speaks in foreign language) is entitled to collect, if there's been improvements to the field. Shvaha, sounds like the improvements, yes, but the peros, no. So if it's not gonna be a (speaks in foreign language) type of scenario, (speaks in foreign language) it must be a case of a (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) And yet, we're saying that he would pay it off, but yet Shmul had said earlier that he can't pay off the Shvaha because it looks like Rives. So, the Gomorrah has two ways to answer this. We have Amur of Yaysev, Amur of Yaysev, and I put a number one in the margin, and three lines later, the end of line is (speaks in foreign language) and again, I put a number two in the margin. So, the first way the Gomorrah answers this, says of Yaysev, (speaks in foreign language) so that it's not gonna be a question on Shmul, (speaks in foreign language) It's a case where he has Roshy says, Roshy's about eight nine lines up in the Roshy's from where we are right now, (speaks in foreign language) This cousin has land. (speaks in foreign language) He gives the purchaser the land. Velomo's, but it's not a money issue, and therefore, even if the land is worth a little bit more than the money that was originally spent, (speaks in foreign language) I double unline the word. (speaks in foreign language) It's one thing, if Algebab $10,000, and Bob gives back 11,000, even if it's not interest, it looks like interest, but if Algebab $10,000, he returns a land that's worth a little bit more, that is not as much a problem of looking like Ribes. Okay, but isn't that still an issue when it comes to interest? (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) In general, we're a little bit concerned because of market fluctuations, if I borrowed a pound from a flower from you to give you back a pound of flower, it could be that pound of flower is worth more, (speaks in foreign language) in a place where he has land. Are you allowed to do that? You can't do that. So then why here is no Ribes problem by the schvach just because the guy is Karka. I thought that didn't make a difference. (speaks in foreign language) It does make a difference 'cause over there, where we said you can't do it, (speaks in foreign language) it's a loan and it's a lot more shy to say that there's Ribes interest issues when it comes to a loan whereas Hocha, over here it says Vini a sale. (speaks in foreign language) This is the second question of what Ribesif said. (speaks in foreign language) What is the case over here? Well, (speaks in foreign language) literally they acquired from him. What did they acquire? So it says Rashi. Rashi is about six lines up from where we are in the Gomorro over in the Rashi. Says Rashi, (speaks in foreign language) of the (speaks in foreign language) that basically, the edem to the document acquired a like a promise or a commitment on behalf of the one purchasing from the seller. Al-Hashvakh for whatever benefit would be added in whatever improvements he would be in. (speaks in foreign language) There, the responsibility would have to compensate should something happen. It existed already (speaks in foreign language) from the time of the sale, (speaks in foreign language) like immediately, even before like a day or a week at past where you get the problem of time passing. (speaks in foreign language) So Bias is back to Ribesif in this second motion. (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) Again, there is an issue of somebody lending someone else a pound of flour if he's gonna get the pound of flour back in a month from now, are you gonna say that the problem dissipates? If there's a (speaks in foreign language) And again, the answer is pretty straightforward. It makes a big difference. If the transaction is a loan or a sale, (speaks in foreign language) where it's an issue, whereas (speaks in foreign language) it was a sale.