))
Bava Batra 5 - June 30, 24 Sivan
Manage episode 426355800 series 2972470
Indhold leveret af Michelle Cohen Farber. Alt podcastindhold inklusive episoder, grafik og podcastbeskrivelser uploades og leveres direkte af Michelle Cohen Farber eller deres podcastplatformspartner. Hvis du mener, at nogen bruger dit ophavsretligt beskyttede værk uden din tilladelse, kan du følge processen beskrevet her https://da.player.fm/legal.
Seder Nezikin Kit - Order Form
Ravina's property surrounded Runia's property on all four sides and Ravina put up a fence and insisted that Runia share in the cost, based on the ruling in the Mishna. Runia did not want to pay. They brought the case in front of Rava who ruled that Runia needed to pay at least the amount of money it would have cost him to bring a guard to protect the property. In another incident, Runia brought property adjacent to Ravina's field and Ravina wanted to kick him off the land and buy the property himself based on the law of dina d'bar metzra, that the person living adjacent to a property can insist on purchasing the field and takes priority to any other buyer. Rav Safra told him to let Runia have the property as Runia needed the land more than Ravina did. If a wall dividing a courtyard of two neighbors falls, even if the wall was higher before it fell, the minimum height needed to rebuild is four cubits. If one neighbor wants to rebuild the wall at its original height, they cannot insist that the other neighbor pay half. However, if the neighbor who does not want to pay to make the wall higher, builds an inner wall and plans to attach a roof from the high dividing wall to the new inner wall, that neighbor has shown that the high wall serves their needs and has to share the cost. If there is a debate between neighbors about whether one paid the other for the cost of the wall, who is believed? On what does it depend? Reish Lakish disagrees with Abaye and Rava regarding a case where the creditor and borrower each claim before the date the loan was due that the loan was/was not repaid. Reish Lakish assumes that people do not pay before the date it is due and therefore the borrower is not believed. Abaye and Rava trust the borrower's claim. First, a section of our Mishna is brought to raise a difficulty against Reish Lakish's position and then the next section is brought to raise a question on Abaye and Rava's position, but each difficulty is resolved. The Gemara concludes that we hold like Reish Lakish and even one who is collecting from orphans can collect even without taking an oath, if the father died before the date the loan was due.
1663 episoder
Del
