Bava Batra 3: לָא עֲבוּד אַמָּה טְרַקְסִין

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Batra 3

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara discusses our Mishna's statements regarding the different matter that is used to build a wall. Interestingly, the rabbis ask how we understand the definition of each word describing material used to build.

We are told the story of Rav Ash who found cracks in his synagogue and had it demolished immediately. To ensure that the new structure would be built immediately, he kept his bed in the demolished shul, knowing that people would run to build the shul around him to keep him sheltered.

How could Bava ben Buta have instructed King Herod to raze the Temple and build the second Temple in that place? It is suggested that perhaps that first Temple had cracks in it. Alternatively, King Herod had the means and the will to rebuild immediately and so there was no fear that the people would go without a Temple for long.

We explore the differences between the first and second temples with Rav Yitzchak Levy’s scholarship.

Bava Batra 2: הֶיזֵּק רְאִיָּה

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Batra 2

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Masechet Bava Batra – the “last gate” – is the third and final section of Masechet Nezikin, the large tractate that deals with financial matters.

Bava Batra differs from its predecessors, Bava Kamma and Bava Metzia, in two ways that are interconnected. While Bava Kamma and Bava Metzia dealt, on some level, with criminal matters, Bava Batra focuses solely on civil law.

Parallel to this, the laws contained in the other two masechtot were often based on sources in the Torah and on the interpretation of the Sages, while our masechet is grounded in Rabbinic enactments whose sources are their understanding of human nature, on community agreements and on the need to establish boundaries and principles for business transactions in the Jewish community.

There are four basic topics covered in this Masechet:

Relationships between neighbors

Working with legal proofs and documents

Sales

Inheritance law.

The first Mishnah teaches that if the two parties agree to divide their courtyard by building a wall, it should be built ba-emtza – in the middle – with each party contributing an equal amount of space, whose area will depend of the type of material that is being used.

The gemoro discusses types of visual trespass which allows us to explore the nature of harm when privacy is violated including online.

Bava Metzia 119: שַׁבּוּר מַלְכָּא

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 118

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara on our daf reports that Efrayim Safra, one of Reish Lakish’s students, quoted Reish Lakish as accepting Rabbi Shimon’s position. When this was shared with Shavor Malka, he praised the good sense of Rabbi Shimon’s ruling.

According to Rashi and other rishonim, our Gemara is referring to the first king Shapur, who continued his father’s success in wars against the Roman Empire, capturing the city of Netzivim and arriving at the border of Syria. In the course of a number of attacks, he not only defeated the Roman emperor Velrinus, but he captured him and held him until his death. With regard to internal matters, he was an open-minded leader, and allowed a good deal of freedom of religion. It appears that he showed an interest in Judaism and was on good terms with the amora Shmuel.

We explore the unique relationship between the Persian King and his representation in the Talmud in many places (12).

Bava Metzia 118: כּוֹתְלוֹ סָמוּךְ לְגִינַּת חֲבֵירוֹ

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 118

To download, click/tap here: PDF

If there are two adjoining gardens and one is on higher ground than the other and a vegetable is growing on the incline between the two gardens R. Meir says it belongs to the upper garden because if he would take away his earth the vegetable would not grow.

R. Yehudah says it belongs to the lower garden because if he would fill his garden with earth the vegetable would cease to exist.

R. Shimon says that if the vegetable was within arm’s reach of the upper garden it belongs to him and if not it belongs to the lower garden.

We explore the garden metaphors in Shir Hashirim as well as Richard II.

Bava Metzia 117: אָדָם דָּר חֶצְיוֹ לְמַטָּה וְחֶצְיוֹ לְמַעְלָה

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 117

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Consider the case of a two-story house, the owner living on the ground floor, and a tenant in the upper story. If part of the floor of the upper apartment fell in - and the owner does not want to repair it - the occupant of the upper apartment may go down and live in the landlord's apartment below until the landlord fixes the upper apartment for him.

What land rights, if any, does the owner of the top floor of a house have?

We explore the metaphor of the attic in modern literature with respect to the darker aspects of misogyny.

Bava Metzia 116: הַבַּיִת וְהָעֲלִיָּיה

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 116

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The tenth and final perek of Massekhet Bava Metzia, Ha-bayit ve-ha’aliya, focuses on one specific situation – when a two story house that is owned by more than one person collapses, either completely or in part. How are the bricks to be divided up? What if the person who owned the bottom floor does not want to rebuild, but his upstairs neighbor does?

We explore the world of forensic science of building collapse.

Bava Metzia 115: רֵחַיִם, וָרָכֶב

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 115

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Mishnah speaks of a case where taking a mashkon is forbidden is when the guarantee would be a millstone or some other implement or utensil that is needed for preparing food at home. The basis for this is also a clear passage in Sefer Devarim (24:6), which is understood to forbid the taking of a mill or anything similar.

The Mishna is referring to a small hand mill that was used in homes.

Hand mills were made with a hole in the top where the grain could be inserted and another on one side where a stick could be placed, allowing the grindstone to be turned. These were often used at home and turned by women who were responsible for running the kitchen.

We explore the laws of Deut 24 and possible relationship to the decalogue as well as the struggle to see the Torah in light oof accent near eastern codes.

Bava Metzia 114: סְחַט גְּלִימָא רֵיחָא

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 114

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf tells of Rabba bar Avuh meeting Elijah the Prophet in a non-Jewish cemetery. Seizing the opportunity he asked him a number of questions:

“Must a borrower be left with enough for him to continue living normally?”

Eliyahu replied that he must, citing a parallel between the laws of mashkon and the laws of arakhin (when someone declares that he will give his worth to the Temple).

Steinsaltz :

"The idea of Elijah the Prophet appearing to the righteous is one that we find often in the Talmud, and, in fact, in post-Talmudic literature, as well. It is clear from the story in our Gemara that Eliyahu does not come to offer prophetic solutions to problems in Jewish law – since halakha cannot be decided based on prophecy – rather he makes use of the ordinary tools of the halakhic decisor. "

We explore this enigmatic passage with the help of Rav Dr Feintuch as well as other scholars.

Bava Metzia 113: בַּחוּץ תַּעֲמֹד

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 113

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Mishna discusses the practice of taking a mashkon – collateral, an object that serves as a guarantee – on a loan. The Torah teaches (Devarim 24:10-13) that a lender cannot enter the borrower’s house to take a mashkon, rather he must wait outside for the borrower to bring it out to him. Furthermore, if the borrower is poor and the object is one that he needs, the lender must return it to him when he needs it. The Mishna specifies that if the guarantee is a pillow, it must be returned at night; if it is a plow it must be returned during the working day.

We return to the ethics of looking after the poor as well as the notion of a good society especially Rabbi Soloveithick’s hopes for the modern state of Israel.

Bava Metzia 112: אַל תִּגְזל דַּל

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 112

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Paying a worker on time is a biblical commandment. In two places the Torah commands that a daily worker must be paid promptly –

Vayikra 19:13 lo talin pe’ulat sakhir itkhah ad boker – “do not retain the wages of a hired worker until the morning,” and

Devarim 24:15 be-yomo ti-ten sekharo, ve-lo yavo alav ha-shemesh – “on that day give him his wages; the sun should not set on it.”

It appears that both situations described by the Torah are cases of a wage earner – someone who gets paid by the day or by the hour. What would the halakha be for a kablan – a contractor who gets paid when he completes the job? Would the laws of lo talin and be-yomo ti-ten sekharo apply also to a contractor who finishes the job? This question was presented to Rav Sheshet, who ruled that the same laws would apply.

We continue our exploration of modern economic systems and the abuses of labor thereof.

Bava Metzia 111: בְּיוֹמוֹ תִתֵּן שְׂכָרוֹ

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 111

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna on our daf continues teaching laws about the biblical requirement to pay a worker on time. According to the Mishna, this rule applies not only to cases of an employee, but also to situations where a person has rented an animal or an object; the renter must offer payment on time – assuming that the person who was to get paid requested payment. If he did not ask to get paid, the employer (or the renter) has not violated the law.

The passage upon which this law is based (Devarim 24:14) delineates who is included in the obligation. The Torah mentions specifically me-ahekha (from your brothers) o mi-gerkha (or from a convert) asher be-artzekha (who is in your land). This is understood to require prompt payment not only to a Jewish worker, but also to a ger tzedek (a righteous convert to Judaism) and a ger toshav (someone who lives in Israel without accepting the commandments).

We explore worker exploitation with reference to the workload of Eric Fromm on Marx.

Bava Metzia 110: לֹֽא־תָלִ֞ין פְּעֻלַּ֥ת שָׂכִ֛יר

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 110

To download, click/tap here: PDF

An employer is prohibited from delaying payment due to his employee: "The wage of a hired worker shall not stay overnight with you until morning." and "On his day shall you pay his hire and the sun shall not set upon him...."

One who is hired for the day and completes his work in the evening collects his payment all night; that is, the entire night constitutes the payment time of the worker. One hired for the night collects all day; that is, the collection time for one who terminates his employment at daybreak is that day.

We explore current halachot regarding hiring workers and paying them on time with specific focus on social hypocrisy and hiring of illegal immigrant Nanny’s.

Bava Metzia 109: לִצְמִיתֻת

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 109

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf cites a Beraisa which teaches that when the Yovel year arrives, any field that was purchased must be returned to its original owner, but the purchaser is not required to "return" the improvements that he made to the field (and thus when he returns the field, the original owner must pay him for the improvements). The Gemara attempts to derive from this law that when a sharecropper ("Mekabel") finishes his work, the owner of the land is similarly obligated to pay him for any improvements that he made to the land.

We explore the radical innovation of Yovel.

Bava Metzia 108: דְּקָא כָּתְבִי פָּרְסָאֵ

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 108

To download, click/tap here: PDF

One of the general commandments in the Torah is Ve-asitah ha-yashar ve-ha-tov lifnei haShem – that you should do what is right and good before God (Devarim 6:18). This mitzva is understood by the Sages as requiring the Jewish people to behave appropriately towards others even when there is no specific monetary obligation to do so. One example is the rule of bar mitzrah – a neighbor. Someone who owns an adjoining field has the first rights to purchase it in the event that his neighbor decides to sell it. Since there are obvious advantages to owning two fields that are right next to each other, the Sages established a number of enactments that give the neighbor preferential treatment when the field is being sold.

We explore the this exhortation is used in different scenarios as a kind of meta-halachic ethic.

Bava Metzia 107: שְׁאֵרִית יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא יַעֲשׂוּ עַוְלָה

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 107

To download, click/tap here: PDF

MISHNA: With regard to one who receives a field from another in order to plant it with barley, he may not plant it with wheat, as wheat weakens the field more than barley does. But if he receives it in order to plant wheat, he may plant it with barley if he wishes, but Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel forbids it.

Rav Ḥisda said: What is the reason of the ruling of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel? The landowner has apparently suffered no loss from the cultivator’s actions. His reasoning is as it is written:

“The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies, neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth” (Zephaniah 3:13).

In other words, one may not retract from an obligation accepted upon oneself, even if no one suffers as a result.

We explore the book of Zephaniah as well as the technical term “She’erit Yisrael.”

Bava Metzia 106: לָקְתָה נוֹתֵן לוֹ מִתּוֹכָהּ

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 106

To download, click/tap here: PDF

According to the last Mishna on our daf, if the agreement was to plant barley he cannot plant wheat, but if the agreement was to plant wheat, he would be allowed to plant barley. Similarly, if the agreement was to plant grain, he cannot plant legumes (kitnit), but if they had agreed that he would plant kitnit, he can choose to plant grain. In both of these cases Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel disagrees, ruling that no change can be made.

The Gemora records an incident: A man leased a field to grow aspasta for kors of barley (which he would buy and pay the landowner with). The field produced a crop of aspasta, and he plowed and replanted it with barley (instead of aspasta), which grew stunted.

We explore the physiology of the Irish potato famine as well as the politics and genocide resulting.

Bava Metzia 105: כְּדֵי לְהַעֲמִיד בָּהּ כְּרִי

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 105

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna on our daf discusses the case of a sharecropper who agrees to work the field in exchange for a certain percentage of the harvest and finds that the field does not produce enough to make it worth his while. According to the Tanna Kamma, if it will produce enough to make a keri – a pile of grain – he is obligated to work the field. Rabbi Yehuda rules that if it will produce the amount of grain that he used for seed, he will have to work the field.

Steinsaltz claims "There is much evidence in the Gemara – particularly in the Talmud Yerushalmi – that the fertility of the land of Israel dropped precipitously during the period of the amora’im.

We find that even during Rabbi Yohanan’s time – in the first generation of amora’im – he mentions a change in the land’s produce. This stemmed, apparently, from a worsening of economic conditions in the Jewish community in Israel, which led to improper use and maintenance of agricultural land at that time. This led to over farming the land, whose consequence was a drop in its ability to support crops.”

We examine the Halachot of silent investors and Dina demalchuta Dina.

Bava Metzia 104: הַכֹּל כְּמִנְהַג הַמְּדִינָה

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 104

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The ninth perek of Massekhet Bava Metzia, which is entitled hamekabel sadeh me-havero – “Someone who receives a field from his friend” – began on yesterday’s daf and its focus is the relationship between the owner of a field and the person who commits to working the field.

We return to 97 to explore the world of cats in antiquity.

Bava Metzia 103: חַיָּיב לְהַעֲמִיד לוֹ בַּיִת

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 103

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our last mishna of the perek states:

In the case of one who rented out a house to another, and then the house fell, the landlord is obligated to provide the renter with another house. If the original house was small, the landlord may not construct a large house as a replacement, and if the original was large, he may not construct a small house as a replacement. If the original had one room, he may not construct the replacement with two rooms, and if the original had two rooms, he may not construct the replacement with one. He may not reduce the number of windows, nor add to them, except with the agreement of both of them.

We explore the halachot of landlord responsibility for home upkeep and condemned properties.

Bava Metzia 102: תְּפוֹס לשָׁוֹן אחַרֲוֹן

For the source text click/tap here: Bava Metzia 102

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Gemara quotes a baraita that asks why the markets of Beit Hino were destroyed three years prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. Its answer was that they were careful only with regard to the biblical requirements of tithes, saying that the passage in Sefer Devarim (14:22-23) discusses harvest and subsequent consumption of one’s own harvested fruit, thereby excluding a seller or a buyer from the obligation of separating terumot and ma’aserot.

Beit Hino was, apparently, the village that is referred to by the name Bethania, or Beit Ḥanan, just outside of Jerusalem, not far from the Mount of Olives. This village was destroyed in the very first days of the Great Revolt, while the siege and battle for Jerusalem lasted a lengthy period of time, explaining the baraita‘s contention that Beit Hino fell three years prior to Jerusalem.

We explore the connection between Bet Hino and Bethany.