The Daf Bset edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, specifically Masechet Bava Kamma, has been generously sponsored in our Daf Yomi program by our good friend and patron, Siyahu Ashchar HaKohen, and his dear wife, Rina. May they continue to have success, prosperity in all their endeavors, health, happiness, and much nachat from their children. May they enjoy many years of shalom bayit, tranquility, and peace of mind. Amen. Today’s daf is being studied in the merit of Batya Kenatiya Fa-btzara, for the elevation of the soul of Avraham ben Ester Asher Shatrit, who is in Gan Eden. Amen. We also dedicate today’s learning for a complete recovery for Moshe ben Nina, as well as for Chaim ben Zahava and Ghazal bat Simcha, for their souls, bodies, and all their limbs among the other sick of Israel. Let us say Amen. We begin today’s daf on Samech Tet Amud Rishon, and we are four lines from the top.
Gufa. Rabbi Yochanan says: We learned in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that if someone steals and the owners have not despaired of the item, neither the owner nor the thief can consecrate it. This is because the thief cannot consecrate it since it does not belong to him, and the owner cannot consecrate it because it is not in his possession. This is the opinion of Rabbi Yochanan. But did Rabbi Yochanan actually say this? Rabbi Yochanan stated that the halacha follows the stam mishnah. Rabbi Yochanan has a general rule in Shas that he always poskens like the stam mishnah, which refers to a mishnah that does not have a named opinion. He poskens when there is no argument on that mishnah.
We have a stam mishnah that states that Kerem Reva'i, the fruit of the fourth year, has kedusha until one redeems it. What would farmers do to protect people from eating from the Kerem Reva'i? They would mark their trees to inform others not to eat from them, as this tree is kodesh. They would mark the Kerem Reva'i with pieces of earth, so that people would know this is special. What is the sign? Like earth. Just as one can benefit from the earth after plowing and planting, so too, after one redeems the Kerem Reva'i, one can benefit from it. The people passing by would see the earth on the tree and understand that this tree is special.
What else did they do? For orlah, the first three years of a tree's growth, they would use pottery as a marker. The sign is like pottery, which provides no benefit. Just as pottery offers no benefit, so too, orlah is prohibited in benefit, and therefore the sign they would put on the tree was something from which there is no benefit. When it comes to graves, how did they mark them? With white limestone, a sign that is white like bones. Just as the bones of the deceased are white, they would smear the grave with white limestone to make it stand out.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel states that the signs used for the Neta Reva'i and orlah apply specifically during the Shemittah year when they are hefker. The concern was that wayfarers might come by and pluck from the trees. They are allowed to do so because it is hefker, and therefore, they needed to place a sign indicating that this is orlah or Neta Reva'i to prevent people from taking it. We are not discussing thieves here. However, during the other years of Shemittah, let the wicked person take it and die, meaning if you are a thief, I need to worry about thieves not eating orlah? You have already made your choice.
We learned about the tznuim, the modest ones, who would put aside money and say that whatever is collected from this should be redeemed on this money. When a thief plucks the fruit from the tree, this money is already its redemption. They did not want the thief to transgress by eating Neta Reva'i, so they would put money aside and say that whatever is taken now should be redeemed on this money. However, the stam mishnah does not subscribe to this practice because how could you make a redemption when it is in someone else's possession? Rabbi Yochanan gave us a rule that when I steal something, neither party can consecrate it.
But what do we see here? Rabbi Yochanan, you are the one who poskens like the stam mishnah, and we have a stam mishnah that does not support this. The gemara asks, did Rabbi Yochanan say this? Rabbi Yochanan stated that the tznuim and Rabbi Dosa say the same thing. Rabbi Dosa spoke after the item was already picked. In what context? Rabbi Yehuda says that in the morning, the owner says that whatever the poor will collect today will be hefker. Rabbi Dosa says that he does this near evening and states that whatever the poor have collected will be hefker. According to Rabbi Dosa, it means it was already in their hands.
Rabbi Yochanan, you stated that Rabbi Dosa and the tznuim said the same thing. This implies that the tznuim hold that you do not make a redemption until the poor have it in their hands, just as Rabbi Dosa said it by the past tense. The gemara answers that we should switch Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Dosa. In this case, Rabbi Dosa would say that whatever the poor will take today is hefker while still in the owner's possession. This resolves the issue.
However, the gemara asks why we had to switch the text. Let us switch Rabbi Yochanan instead. We can say that the tznuim and Rabbi Yehuda say the same thing. This is a valid argument. The gemara concludes that we cannot make such a switch because the text states that Rabbi Yehuda holds of breira, retroactive selection.
The gemara further explains that Rabbi Yehuda does not hold of breira, as seen in a case involving wine from the kutim. The gemara concludes that the tznuim and Rabbi Dosa indeed say the same thing. Rabbi Yochanan has presented three reasons why we might have thought they were not saying the same thing.
In conclusion, the discussion revolves around the halachic implications of ownership and possession in the context of theft and redemption. Rabbi Yochanan's position, alongside the views of the tznuim and Rabbi Dosa, highlights the complexities of these laws and the careful considerations that must be taken into account when dealing with matters of ownership, especially in cases involving theft and the potential for redemption.