About this episode
Today's daf is sponsored in honor of Esther's birthday. "To my big sister, thank you for introducing me to this shiur. I'm so proud of you. Many happy and healthy returns!" Regarding the debate between Rabbi Akiva and the rabbis about whether a seller sells generously (Rabbi Akiva) or sparingly (the rabbis), Rav ruled like the rabbis, and Shmuel like Rabbi Akiva. The difference of opinion between Rav and Shmuel on this issue is compared to a different debate between Rav and Shmuel regarding the distribution of inherited property. However, the comparison is rejected as the circumstances are unique and not applicable in a regular sale. Rav Huna held like Rav, and Rav Nachman held like Shmuel, but Rav Huna deferred to Rav Nachman as he was an expert in monetary law. If one sells an inner house and an outer house to two different people, both Rabbi Akiva and the rabbis will hold that the inner resident cannot pass through the outer resident's house as the seller has no reason to favor one over the other. However, if the inner one received the house as a gift, there is an assumption that a gift is given generously and therefore the buyer would be able to pass through the outer house without having to purchase an access route. If one sells a house without specifying what parts are included, does it include the door, key, lock, mortar, millstone, oven, etc? The Mishna explains that items that are attached to the ground are included, while those that are moveable are not. The Mishna is not in accordance with Rabbi Meir who held that one who sells a vineyard, any objects that serve the vineyard are included in the sale, even if they are not attached to the ground. A braita similar to the Mishna is quoted, however, there are some differences. In the braita, Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree about an item attached to the ground after its construction. Tosefta Mikvaot 4:1 is brought regarding a pipe through which water is brought to the mikveh. If it is hollowed out (constructed) and then attached to the ground, it is considered a vessel and disqualifies the mivkeh as the water is considered ' mayim she'uvim,' water that is drawn with a vessel. The Gemara explains that this Tosefta doesn't correspond to Rabbi Eliezer's nor the rabbis' opinions. To which opinion of Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis is this statement referring? At first, the Gemara suggests it is referring to Rabbi Eliezer in the previous braita, but that suggestion is rejected. Then they suggest Rabbi Eliezer's opinion regarding a beehive as per the Mishna Shviit 10:4. This too, will be rejected.