Zichru4Life
Bava Basra Daf 129
"Is it possible for the first of all, we can validate the redistribution of one's estate? Four sheetes." The mission of the first of all says that if a person instructed to divide his estate differently, then what the tire says, his instructions are ignored. However, if he added an expression of "Mattanna," whether it's at the beginning, the middle or the end, it works. There are four sheetes about the extent of this "alacham." We have Dimi quote "de biergenan," it's only if it's one person and one Sada, but if it's one person and two Sada's, or two people and one Sada, the "Mattanna" of one does not work for the other. A beloved says they do work, but not if it's two fields and two people. Robin says name "Biergenan," even two fields and two people. "Bishlakish holds it only works by two fields and two people if you use two Luchenes and Mattanna. Reuben and Schimann should be Yerish field one and field two, which I am giving to them as gifts, and they should be Yerish them." Second second is the "deaf," the "Raya" from Nixi Lachvarach, Yerish Pliny. It actually disproves the first two sheetes from a "Briser" that says "Nixi Lachvarach or Yerish Pliny," the "Achvarach or Yerish Pliny." The "Briser" says that after the first one dies, the second one's "Kina," after the second one dies, the third one's "Kina." If the second one dies before the first, the first one's "Yerish" and "Mayyerish." Now, this case is like a person giving two fields with two people, whereby one of them used "Mattanna" and the other one "Yerusha," and we see the second one's "Kina." The "Gomara" and "Zuaf" at this "Briser" is at "Yerishter" on the sheetes that hold that it doesn't work by two fields and two people. Thirds again, the "Daf" for "Yerish Lachish" agrees one "Mattanna" phrase works when it's "Techt de Dibor." The "Gomara" asked that the above "Briser" should also be a "Steer" on "Mish Lachish," who says it only works by two fields and two people when "Techt de Dibor" is the "Mattanna" we used. Because this "Briser" is talking about a case of one "Lachn de Mattanna." I think Marx finds it can't be a "2/10" "Mish Lachish," because this is one of the three places that rub a "Paskin's Lachish Lachish." Rather, "Yerish Lachish" answers that this "Briser" is talking about a case where you said both of them "Techt de Dibor," since they were said together, we put the "Mattanna" together from "Misht de Lach" and "Misht de Lachish" and "Misht de Lachish" in the "Misht de Lachish" and "Misht de Lachish" in the "Misht de Lachish," and "Misht de Lachish" in the "Misht de Lachish" it, making sure the second lotion of Yusha was said, take the debur of the single lotion of Matana. Cactus reminds us of Dafkofrathas. The man who said Reuben and Schimman should be Yerish may two cactus fields, which I'm giving them as gifts, and they should be Yerish them. Reminds of the first Suga Nadaaf, where a Matana phrase can validate the redistribution of one's estate, foreshitas. He heard his neighbor tell his friends, "My cactus properties shall be given to you when I die, and after you die plain it should be Yerish it." Reminds of the second Suga Nadaaf, the Raia from Nixiela for Yerish plainy. And he made sure that the second lotion of Yerushah was said, take the debur of the single lotion of Matana. Reminds of the third Suga Nadaaf, where Schlockers agrees one Matana phrase works when it's take the debur.
129