Bava Batra 62 - August 26, 22 Av

This week's learning is sponsored by Rozy Jaffe and family in loving memory of her father Mickey Muhlrad, משה יעקב בן ר׳ דוד ע״ה on his 11th yahrzeit. "My father was a humble man of incredible honesty and integrity. He never spoke Loshen Hara and though his cheder studies were cut short by WWII- he supported and encouraged Torah learning for his children and others throughout his lifetime!"  Today's daf is sponsored by Gitta and David Neufeld in loving memory of Harlene Appleman, Chaya bat Osna Rachel v’Shmuel. "Harlene, our cherished friend and mentor, was the consummate professional and the ultimate friend. Her clear sechel and her passion for Jewish education and identity continue to “whisper in my ear” as an expression of שפתי ישנים דובבות. May our learning be a zechut for her!"  If one designates the border of a field but one side extends farther than the other, what size field does the buyer get? Rav rules that a line is drawn from the shorter border, but Rav Kahana and Rav Asi say that a trapezoid shape is drawn from the shorter border to the longer one. In what case did Rav concede to the others? A question is asked about three similar cases – where the border delineated is just the corners of a field, or in the shape of an L, or there were two fields on each side and the border delineated skipped every other one. No answer is given to these questions. If three border strips were delineated but the fourth was not, does the seller get the field and the fourth border strip, the field without the fourth border strip, or just a strip of land alongside each of the three border strips? Rav, Shmuel, and Rav Asi each hold a different position. Rava rules and the Gemara brings two different versions of Rava’s ruling. The Gemara then summarizes the two different versions of Rava’s ruling. The Ramban and others comment that the summary is an addition of Rav Yehudai Gaon and not part of the original Gemara. Raba brings two rulings in which he differentiates between different wording used and their meaning. Abaye disagrees with both differentiations and holds that in each case, there is no difference in the law whether one language was used or another – the meaning is the same.