Daf Hashvua and Tosfos: Megila 27 By Chaim Smulowitz LearnTosfos.com Daf 27a

New Sugya

R' Pappi quotes Rav; you may make a Shul into a Beis Medrish, but you can't make a Beis Medrish into a Shul. R' Pappa quotes Rava to say the opposite. R' Acha says: it seems that R' Pappi's opinion is more probable. After all, R' Yehoshua b. Levi says that you can make a Shul into a Beis Medrish. This is a proof.

Tosfos says: from here it seems that the Halacha is like R' Yehoshua when he argues with R' Yochanan. After all, the Gemara brings a proof to R' Pappi that R' Yehoshua b. Levi agrees with him despite that R' Yochanan disagrees, (as we'll see later in the Gemara).

As B. Kapara Darshens: what does the Pasuk mean by "the house of Hashem was burned, and so was the king's house, and so too all the houses in Jerusalem and all raising houses was burned in fire?" "The house of Hashem was burned," that refers to the Beis Hamikdash. "And so was the king's house," this is his palace. "And so too all the houses in Jerusalem," this is like its simple meaning. "And all raising houses were burned in fire," the meaning is an argument between R' Yochanan and R' Yehoshua b. Levi. One says that it raises , and the other says that it raises Tefila. The opinion that holds that it's the Torah, as it says "Hashem desires for the sake of his righteousness, the raising of Torah and strengthening it." According to the opinion that it's Tefila, as it says "count now the greatness that Elisha did," which he did through Davening. The Gemara says: let us bring a proof that R' Yehoshua b.Levi said that they raise there Torah, as he says that you can make a Shul into a Beis Medrish (so we see that Torah is greater than Davening).

New Sugya

The Gemara inquires: can you sell an old to buy a new Sefer Torah? Do we say that, since you're not bringing it to a higher Kedusha, it is forbidden, or, since there is no higher Kedusha to buy, it's permitted. The Gemara wants to bring a proof from the Mishna. As it says that, if you sell a Sefer Torah, you can't buy Sefarim of Nach. This implies that, you only can't buy Sefarim, but you're allowed to buy a Torah with the money. The Gemara rejects the proof: that's B'dieved, that, if you sold the old Sefer Torah, the only thing you can do with the money is to buy a new one. However, we can still inquire if you can sell it in the first place to buy a new one?

The Gemara brings a proof from the following: you can roll a Sefer Torah (to cover it) in a cover for Chumashim, you can roll Chumashim in a Nach's cover, but you can't roll Nach in a cover, and you can't roll a Chumash in a Sefer Torah's cover. So, we said that you can

Project of Ahavas Olam Torah Center: Rav Simcha Klein, Rabbi roll a Sefer Torah in a Chumash's cover, implying but you can't roll it in a cover of another Sefer Torah (so you can't exchange one Sefer Torah for another). The Gemara rejects this proof. After all, the Braisa also says that you can't roll a Chumash in a Sefer Torah's cover, implying that one Sefer Torah can be rolled in another Sefer Torah's cover. The Gemara concludes: therefore, this Braisa is inconclusive.

The Gemara brings a proof: you may place a Sefer Torah on another Sefer Torah, or on a Chumash. You may put a Chumash on a Nach. However, you can't put a Nach on a Chumash and not a Chumash on a Sefer Torah. (So, we see that Sifrei Torah can be used as a base for another Sefer Torah, so we should also assume that you may sell a Sefer to buy a Sefer.) The Gemara answers: we can't compare selling to placing on top since it's impossible to store them any other way. After all, if you would forbid it, how can you roll a Sefer Torah since you're placing one Daf over another Daf. Therefore, since it's impossible any other way, it's permitted. So too, since it's impossible any other way to store them, it's permitted.

The Gemara brings a proof from the following: Rabbah b. b. Chana quotes R' Yochanan: R' Shimon b. Gamliel says; a person can't sell an old Sefer Torah to buy a new one. The Gemara rejects this proof: that may be (if it wasn't written yet, and you might end up negligently not end up writing it). Our inquiry is if the new Sefer Torah is written and right before us ready to buy.

The Gemara brings a proof from the following: R' Yochanan quotes R' Meir; you can't sell a Sefer Torah but to enable you to learn Torah or to married. Therefore, we see you can sell Torah for other Torah. The Gemara rejects this proof; perhaps learning is difference since it brings him to do proper actions. Also, they allowed it to marry a woman since the Pasuk says "He didn't create it (i.e., the world) to be desolate, but he created it to be inhabited. However, they wouldn't allow selling one Sefer Torah to buy another one.

We learned: someone shouldn't sell a Sefer Torah even if he has no need for it anymore. R' Shimon b. Gamliel says further: even if the person doesn't have what to eat, if he sells a Sefer Torah, or his daughter (for a maid), he will never see any blessing from it.

New Sugya

We say that the same applies to the leftovers (that you can't sell it for a less holy item). Rava says: this is only true if you sold a holy item and you had leftover money (after you bought another holy item). However, if you only collected the money to buy a holy item, the leftovers are permitted. Abaya asks: the Braisa says that it's only applies if you didn't make a condition. However, if you made a condition, you may use the money even for a Duchsusya, (it will be defined later). What's the case of this Braisa? It can't be when they sold a holy item, since what good could the condition do, (since it will still be forbidden)? Rather, we must say that it refers to collecting the money and having leftovers, and it's only permitted if you made a condition, but it's

LearnTosfos.com 1 Project of Ahavas Olam Torah Center: Rav Simcha Klein, Rabbi forbidden without a condition. The Gemara answers: really we refer to a case where you sold a holy item and had leftovers, and this is what we mean to say: it's only permitted if you made a condition before the seven city caretakers in front of the people of the city, and only then you can use the money for a Duchsusya.

Tosfos asks: if you made a condition with the seven city caretakers in front of the people of the city, why is this applicable to leftovers? After all, you can do what you want with all the money, like we said earlier that you can even buy beer with it, as Rashi explains: you can buy beer from the proceeds just to drink.

Tosfos answers: it's brought as a Chidush that even if it's leftovers, it's only permitted with a condition. After all, I might think that once you bought the holy item with the proceeds, you can do with the leftovers whatever you want even without any conditions, so we're taught otherwise.

Abaya asked one of the who was saying Braisos before R' Shieshes if he heard from R' Sheishes what a Duchsusya is? He answered: this is what R' Sheishes said: a Duchsusya is a horse rider who's hired by the city to send messages to the government. Abaya says: therefore, if a budding scholar hears a statement and doesn't understand the meaning (of the words) should ask someone who is constantly by rabbis since he must have heard about it from a great man.

R' Yochanan quotes R' Meir: if the citizens of one city went to another city (on a fast), and the people of the city place upon them to give Tzedaka; they must give it to the Tzedaka administrator (so that people shouldn't suspect them of not giving their obligation), but when they depart the city, they ask for the money back and they bring it back to their city and distribute it amongst their city's poor. We have a Braisa like that: if the citizens of one city went to another city, and the people of the city place upon them to give Tzedaka; they must give it to the Tzedaka administrator (so that people shouldn't suspect them of not giving their obligation), but when they depart the city, they ask for the money back and they bring it back to their city. However, if an individual visits the other city and they place upon him to give Tzedaka, he distributes the Tzedaka among that city's poor.

R' Huna decreed a fast. R' Chana b. Chanilai and all his city went to R' Huna's city. They placed an obligation to give Tzedaka upon them, and they gave it. When they wanted to leave, they told R' Huna to give it back to them so that they can distribute it amongst the poor of their city. He answered back: (I don't need to) since we learned; when is it given back, when there is no Talmid Chachum there.

Daf 27b

LearnTosfos.com 2 Project of Ahavas Olam Torah Center: Rav Simcha Klein, Rabbi

However, if there's a Talmid Chachum (who takes care of the city's needs), you give it to him. This is especially true in this case where my city's poor people and your city's poor people rely on me to support them.

New Sugya

R' Meir says that you can't sell a Shul that belongs to a congregation to an individual since you're lowering its Kedusha (since communal Shuls are more holier than individual ones. The Chachumim (disagree) and claimed; if so, you shouldn't be able to sell a Shul that belongs to a bigger congregation to a smaller congregation.

The Gemara says: the Chachumim's claim seems to be a valid one (so, what would R' Meir answer?) R' Meir would claim that there is still Kedusha when a larger congregation sells it to a smaller one, (since you can say and Kedusha and all other Tefilos of Kedusha). However, when you go from a congregation to an individual it loses the Kedusha (since you can only say these Kedusha Tefilos with a Minyan). However, the Rabanan say: still, you should be worried that you're missing some of the concept of "the bigger multitude brings glory to the King."

New Sugya

R' Meir holds that you can't sell a Shul but on condition that, if you want, you may buy it back. The Chachumim say you can sell it indefinitely (without such a condition). Except for, you can't sell it for four things; for a bathhouse, a tannery, for a Mikva and for a bathroom. R' Yehuda says that you can sell it to use as a courtyard, and then the buyer (after the sale) can make whatever he wants out of it.

The Gemara asks: how can R' Meir hold that the buyer can live ther since it's excepting interest. (After all, since the sellers receive money, and they can repay it to get the Shul back, it resembles a loan. If so, the buyer now gets his money back plus he gets to live there until it's paid back, and the pleasure of getting the use of the house is interest on the loan.) R' Yochanan answers: R' Meir holds of R' Yehuda's opinion that you can except interest if it's one sided. (I.e., if the interest may not happen, since the sellers may not buy it back. Therefore, it's only a chance that there will be interest, and it's permitted.) As we learned; if someone lent money, and he sold his field with it, (i.e., if you don't pay back by a certain time, I'll keep the field, and the loan money I gave you will be payment.) If the seller eats the fruit in the meantime, it's permitted. If the buyer eats the fruit in the meantime, the Tanna Kama says that it's forbidden (since he might pay off the loan and the fruit he ate is extra and is interest). R' Yehuda permits even if the buyer eats the fruit (since he might not pay back and he's just eating the fruit from the field that he bought). R' Yehuda brings a proof from Babitos b. Zonan that he made such a condition through the approval of R' Elazar b. Azarya and the buyer ate the fruit. The Rabanan answered back; is that a proof? It was really the seller who

LearnTosfos.com 3 Project of Ahavas Olam Torah Center: Rav Simcha Klein, Rabbi ate the fruit and not the buyer. What's the argument dependent on? On one sided interest. The Tanna Kama forbids and R' Yehuda permits.

Tosfos asks: how is this different than lending a Saah for a Saah? (I.e., you lend someone a Saah measurement of grain, and he'll pay you back the same Saah measurement. The problem is that the price of grain might increase in the meanwhile and he'll end up giving something that's worth more than he borrowed.) Therefore, the Gemara says that it's forbidden since it's a one sided Ribis that, perhaps the price of grain will rise, (but it also might not go up in price).

Tosfos answers: our case is more lenient since the transaction was under the guise of a sale, not a loan.

Tosfos asks further: why is the Saah for a Saah case different than if you give a collateral of a field or a house for a loan and you made a condition that, if you want to sell the field, you must sell it to me for the price of the loan, and the lender eats the fruit in the meantime? After all, the Gemara there forbids it, and R' Huna b. R' Yehoshua qualifies it that it's not according to R' Yehuda's opinion. So, it also originated as a loan and R' Yehuda permits it when it's a one sided Ribis (on the side that he won't end up buying it). If so, why does he forbid a Saah for a Saah?

Tosfos answers: it's not similar to Saah for a Saah where it's completely a loan without any selling at all. However, by the collateral, there's a chance for it to be a sale (so he permits it).

Rava says that they really argue if you can give interest on condition to return it (i.e., if it comes out that it wasn't a sale, but just a loan, the lender would pay bak all the fruit that he ate). The Tanna Kama forbids it and R' Yehuda permits it.

Tosfos explains: therefore R' Meir in our Mishna will hold that they need to pay rent for the Shul when the sellers buy back the Shul, and this is how R' Yehuda allowed it.

New Sugya

R' Yehuda quotes Shmuel: someone can urinate within four Amos of where he Davened (in the field). R' Yosef asks: what's the Chidush? After all, we learned that R' Yehuda says that you can sell the Shul for a courtyard and the buyer can then use it for whatever he wants (even for a bathroom). Not only that, but even according to the Rabanan who argue only do so when you started with a Shul with an established Kedusha, but they will agree here that within four Amos of where you once Davened doesn't have an establish Kedusha.

LearnTosfos.com 4 Project of Ahavas Olam Torah Center: Rav Simcha Klein, Rabbi

Someone taught a Braisa before R' Nachman that someone who Davens must distance himself four Amos before he urinates, and someone who urinates must distance himself four Amos before he Davens. R' Nachman said; I understand why someone needs to distance himself four Amos after he urinates before he Davens since we have a Mishna that says that you must distance yourself four Amos from urine and dung (before Davening). However, why must someone distance himself four Amos after he Davened so he can urinate? (After all, you can't say that the Davening gives a Kedusha to the place), for, if so, then all the streets of Nahardai should be Kodesh (since someone must have once Davened in that place). R' Nachman answers: you should say the real text is that you need to wait (the amount that it takes to walk four Amos before you do the second action). The Gemara says: I understand why someone should wait four Amos after urinating to Daven since there might still be drips (that need to be absorbed); but why must someone who Davened wait four Amos to urinate? R' Ashi answers: since he just finished Davening and the Tefila is still upon his lips, his lips are still moving (with words of Tefila).

New Sugya

The students of R' Zacai asked him; what caused you to merit long life? He answered: I never urinated within four Amos of the place that I Davened.

Tosfos explains: even when he had a true Heter to do so, like when he waited the amount it takes to walk four Amos.

I never gave my friend a nickname.

Tosfos explains: even if the nickname is not disgracing. This, in which we say that someone who gives a nickname to his friend doesn't have a portion in the world to come, that's when it hints to degrading his family's status (like hinting that they're Mamzeirim).

I never missed Kiddush. I had an elderly mother, and one day she sold her hat on her head to bring me Kiddush. We learned: (although they were originally poor, they merited to become rich because of this self sacrifice) that, when she died, she left to R' Zacai three hundred barrels of wine. When R' Zacai died, he left to his sons three thousand barrels of wine.

Tosfos points out: it's as the Gemara in Shabbos says: if someone's careful in making Kiddush, he'll merit to have his barrels filled with wine.

R' Huna girded himself with a vine and came before Rav. Rav asked him why he did this. He answered: I didn't have wine for Kiddush and I borrowed money for it and gave my belt as a collateral. Rav gave him a blessing for this: you should merit to have your body covered (with nice clothing). When R' Huna married off his son Rabbah, it happened, since he was a short man, when he was laying on a bed, his daughters a daughter-in-laws came in and (didn't see him) and dumped

LearnTosfos.com 5 Project of Ahavas Olam Torah Center: Rav Simcha Klein, Rabbi their coats on him until his body was covered. When Rav heard of this, he was upset. He said to R' Huna, why didn't you respond to me "as your blessing, the same should happen to you, my master." (After all, since it worked, maybe it would have worked for me too if I received your blessing.)

The students of R' Elazar b. Shamua asked him what he did to merit long life. He answered: I never made a Shul a shortcut, I never stepped on the head of this holy nation (i.e., when everyone was already sitting on the floor, I didn't walk behind them, as giving an impression that I'm stepping on their heads), I never Duchened without making the Birchas Hamitzva first.

LearnTosfos.com 6