The Eddie D Sit edition presents an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, specifically focusing on the tractate Masechet Bava Batra. This tractate, the longest in terms of pages in Shas, has been dedicated by our good friend and pioneer student in the Daf Yomi Shiur, Adam Ezra, may Hashem protect and sustain him, for the success of his dear children. May they grow up to bring him much nachas, and may they be endowed with chochma, bina, and da'at. With the help of Hashem, may they merit, at the right time, proper zivugim, and achieve success in parnasa, wealth, and honor, from now until eternity. Amen. Today’s daf is being studied in memory of Avraham ben Esther, may the soul of the Holy One, blessed be He, rest in Gan Eden. Amen. Furthermore, today’s daf is being studied for a complete recovery for Moshe ben Nun and Mickey Meir ben Jamie Jamila. We begin today’s daf on kuf-samech-aleph amud bet, starting from the lines beginning with Amar Rabbi Yitzchak.
Rabbi Yitzchak bar Yosef states that Rabbi Yochanan said, “Whenever one makes an erasure in a shtar, one must perform what is called kiyum. This means that at the end of the shtar, one must write: ‘On line number 26, we erased the word and replaced it with this word,’ and the edim must come and sign to establish the kiyum. This is necessary to ensure that the erasure was not made after the signature, which could otherwise invalidate the shtar. Therefore, one must perform kiyum for the mechika.
According to the Rashbam, all those who erase must write their kiyum. It is important to note that if the erasure is not in a place that is sharir v'kayam, it must be done before the sharir v'kayam is written. This indicates that the edim kesherim must affirm the kiyum at the end of the shtar, before the declaration of sharir v'kayam. This is crucial because if they are not affirmed, there is concern that an erasure could have occurred after the witnesses signed.
Before concluding the shtar, one must include a line stating that if the kiyum is not established, one should be concerned that the erasure could have been forged or altered as desired after the shtar was written or after the signatures of the edim. Therefore, one writes: ‘You should know that in this line, we erased and wrote in place of the word one hundred, we wrote one thousand.’ After this, the edim sign, and everything is valid. Additionally, the last line of the shtar should always review the events of the entire document. New conditions must not be introduced in this final line; it must simply recap what has already been mentioned.
For example, in a ketubah, the last line states: ‘And we made a kinyan from the groom on everything that is mentioned above.’ This is a summary, and no additional kinyanim should be added. The Rashbam clarifies that this is to ensure that the last line does not introduce any new conditions or stipulations that the shtar is dependent upon, as we do not learn from the last line of a shtar. This is because the last line is not taken seriously; it could lead to invalidation of the shtar, as it might introduce conditions that were not previously established.
The Gemara explains that if a new item is added at the end of the shtar, the entire document becomes invalid. The Rashbam further elaborates that this applies specifically when the declaration of sharir v'kayam has not yet been written. However, if sharir v'kayam is written, there is no concern, regardless of how much space is left. The Gemara raises a question regarding the source of this law, and the response cites a b'raita stating that if the witnesses are distanced by two lines from the text, the shtar is invalid. However, if they are one line away, it is valid.
The Gemara seeks to understand why two lines render the document invalid, as it raises concerns about potential forgery. One line, however, is not a concern for forgery since we do not learn from the last line. The Rashbam explains that this is true specifically when sharir v'kayam has not been written, allowing for potential additions. The Gemara then discusses a scenario where there are four or five witnesses signed on a shtar, and one of them is found to be disqualified due to a familial relationship. In such a case, the testimony of the remaining valid witnesses is sufficient.
The Gemara supports this by referring to Chizkiyah's statement that filling the shtar with relatives is valid. The Rashbam explains this by indicating that if the shtar has two blank lines, it is invalid. However, if relatives are used to fill in the lines, it can validate the shtar. The Gemara draws a parallel to the laws of a sukkah, where air space can invalidate the structure if it exceeds three tefachim, but filling it with invalid material can still render the sukkah valid.
Thus, while an empty space in a shtar invalidates it, filling it with invalid witnesses can still maintain its validity. This principle is well illustrated in the laws of the sukkah, where filling an empty space with invalid material is permissible as long as the overall structure complies with the halachic requirements. In conclusion, we see that maintaining the integrity of the shtar is paramount, and understanding the nuances of these laws is essential to ensure that documents remain valid and enforceable. Baruch Hashem l'olam, amen and amen.