[popup url=”http://www.torahanytime.com/scripts/media.php?file=media/Rabbi/Baruch_Bodenheim/2011-08-03/Tractate_Bava_Metzia_Eilu_Metzios_22B_Conclusion_of_Yeush_Shelo_Midaas_Giving_Up_Without_Knowledge/Rabbi__Baruch_Bodenheim__Tractate_Bava_Metzia_Eilu_Metzios_22B_Conclusion_of_Yeush_Shelo_Midaas_Giving_Up_Without_Knowledge__2011-08-03.wmv”]Tractate Bava Metzia Eilu Metzios 22B Conclusion of Yeush Shelo Midaas Giving Up Without Knowledge[/popup]

Learn Gem 22b “Ta Shma D’Amar R” Yochanon..” thru “Hilchasa Kavasai KAbayei .. ”  Focus on 1) How we learn out from Zuta Shel Yam that Yiush Shlo Mdaas is Not Yiush (Machlokes Rashi and Tosfos “Isura”)  Question of the night;  R Yishmael says we learn an item lost by Zuta Shel Yam can be kept by the finder.  How can this be learnt from the Posuk quoted, the Posuk is dealing with the laws of “Hashavas Aveida”  So all we see is Zuta Shel Yam is excluded from the Mitzva of Hashevas Aveida but how do we know the ownership of the original owner has been removed?   (See Rashi Bava Kama 66a “Motzah Aveida”. Rashba Bava Metzia 21a “Zuta ..”)

CLICK HERE for Audio

Learn last “Ta Shma” of Gem 22a until next “Ta Shma” on 22b. Focus on the conclusion of the Gemara 1) Are we still remaining with the law that the owner himself needs to place the water on the fruits? 2) How do we reconcile the question on Rava? Start next “Ta Shma D’Amar R” Yochanon..” on 22b untill “Isura Dumia Dhetera” See Rashi Bava Kama 66a “Motzah Aveida”
Question of the week; How is the concept of “The revelation of ones conscent now revealing that initially he conscented” related to the dispute of Yiush shlo mdaas?
Yasher Koach to Allen Kahn and Yaakov Meir Goldstein for sending in an answer to last weeks question that I asked at the end of shiur.

CLICK HERE for Audio

Learn last “Ta Shma” of Gem 22a until next “Ta Shma” on 22b. Focus on 1) Why is this Braissa a question on Rava. Learn first Maharam Shif 22b, last Shita Mekubetzes on 22a. 2) In conclusion of the Gemara how do we reconcile the question on Rava. Question of the week; How is the concept of “The revelation of ones conscent now revealing that initially he conscented” related to the dispute of Yiush shlo mdaas? (BTW I am still waiting for an answer for last weeks and this past Mon night’s question)

[popup url=”http://www.torahanytime.com/scripts/media.php?file=media/Rabbi/Baruch_Bodenheim/2011-07-25/Tractate_Bava_Metzia_Page_22_Side_One_Who_Takes_Without_Knowledge/Rabbi__Baruch_Bodenheim__Tractate_Bava_Metzia_Page_22_Side_One_Who_Takes_Without_Knowledge__2011-07-25.wmv”]Tractate Bava Metzia Page 22 Side One  One Who Takes Without Knowledge![/popup]

Learn the Gem from first wide line “Ameimar …” untill “Ta Shma ..” end of the 2nd to last line on the Amud. What is the Machlokes between the Amaroim whether it is permitted to eat the fruits presented to them from the sharecropper? Learn Tosfos “Mar Zutra, Ritva “Amaimar ..” then Start next Ta Shma of the Gem. Question of the night; In the conclusion of the Gem we say ” Mitzva is different” 1) What does this reasoning explain? 2) Do we need to establish the case of Teruma that he appointed him a Shliach?