REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Gitin 55
GITIN 53-55 - Sponsored by Rabbi Dr. Eli Turkel and his wife, Jeri Turkel.
May Hashem bless them with many years of Simcha, health and fulfillment, and
may they see all of their children and grandchildren follow them in the ways
of Torah and Yir'as Shamayim!
(a) What did Rebbi Yochanan ben Gudgoda testify with regard to ...
(b) Who inherits the latter in the event of her death?
- ... a Chareshes whose father married her off when she was a Ketanah? Will the same apply to a Chareshes who accepted her own Kidushin as a Gedolah?
- ... a Ketanah bas Yisrael who is married to a Kohen? What is the Chidush?
(c) And what did Rebbi Yochanan ben Gudgoda testify with regard to ...
(d) What is this Mishnah doing here in Gitin?
- ... a stolen beam which the thief built into his mansion? Why is that?
- ... a stolen Chatas which is not publicly known to have been stolen?
(a) Rava extrapolates a leniency regarding a Get from Rebbi Yochanan ben
What does the husband do after having shown the witnesses the Get
(not in his wife's presence) that he is about to give his wife? What does he
tell his wife as he hands her the Get?
(b) What is the Chidush? Is it not obvious that following the Tana's words,
such a Get will be valid?
(c) How do we know that he did not in fact, cancel the Get?
(d) Why did he do such a strange thing? Why did he not divorce his wife
(a) How do we know that a Chareshes who married a Kohen is not permitted to
(b) Why can the reason for this Halachah not be because we are afraid that
if she marries a Cheresh Kohen he may feed her?
(c) We conclude that what we are afraid of is that perhaps a Cheresh Kohen
will then feed his wife who is a Pikachas.
Seeing as that Kidushin too, is
only mi'de'Rabbanan, why should he not be permitted to feed her Terumah
de'Rabbanan (such as vegetables and fruit [other than grain, wine and oil])?
(d) We learned in our Mishnah that if a thief built a stolen beam into his
mansion, he may pay the value of the beam ... .
Is this a unanimous
(a) And we learned in our Mishnah that a stolen Chatas which is not publicly
known to have been stolen - will atone for its new owner.
Answers to questions
Ula, min ha'Torah, whether the Chatas is known to have been stolen or not,
it will not atone for the thief.
(b) Ula adds that the reason the Chachamim decreed that it should, is in
order that the Kohanim should not be depressed.
What does this mean? Why
should the deeds of the thief cause the Kohanim to become depressed?
(c) If the reason is as Ula states, then why did the Mishnah give the reason
as 'Tikun Mizbei'ach'?
(d) By what authority did the Chachamim exempt the thief from bringing the
Chatas that he was obligated to bring? Why is this not considered uprooting
(a) According to Rav Yehudah, min ha'Torah, the Chatas atones for the thief
whether the theft is publicly known or not.
According to Rav Yehudah, why does the Tana of our Mishnah say 'Al Chatas
ha'Gezulah *she'Lo Nod'ah la'Rabim* she'Hi Machaperes ... ', since,
according to him, the decree was on 'Chatas ha'Gezulah *she'Nod'ah
Why is that?
(b) Then why did the Chachamim decree that if it is, it will not atone?
(c) According to Ula, it is easy to understand why the Tana talks
specifically about a Chatas, rather than the more common Olah.
(d) But why does the Tana talk about a Chatas according to Rav Yehudah,
seeing as we are only concerned with the *Mizbe'ach* 'eating theft'?
(a) What does the Mishnah in Bava Kama say about someone who stole an animal
and then declared it Hekdesh before Shechting or selling it vis-a-vis
payment of double and four or five times?
(b) In the latter case, why is the thief exempt from paying four or five
(c) What does the Tana of a Beraisa add to the Mishnah regarding Shechutei
(d) According to Ula, asks Rava, who maintains that Yi'ush does not acquire,
how can he can possibly become Chayav Kareis.
How does Rav Shizbi answer
(a) What did Rava comment when they all laughed at Rav Shizbi because they
did not consider the notion of Kareis de'Rabbanan feasible?
(b) So how did Rava explain Rav Shizbi's statement?
(c) Rava was initially in a dilemma whether the Rabbanan placed the animal
in the domain of the thief from the time of the theft, or from the time that
he declared it Hekdesh.
What are the ramifications of Rava's She'eilah?
(d) What does Rava conclude?
(a) What is a Sikrikun?
(b) Which battle is the Tana of our Mishnah referring to when he says 'Lo
Hayah Sikrikun bi'Yehudah ba'Harugei Milchamah'?
(c) Why is the sale void, if someone purchases a field ...
(d) What will be the Din if someone first purchased the field from the owner
or the wife, and then from the Sikrikun or the husband?
- ... from the Sikrikun and then from the owner?
- ... that is designated for the wife's Kesuvah from the husband and then from the wife?
(a) The above is the opinion of the Mishnah Rishonah (which will be
explained shortly). The Mishnah Acharonah requires someone who purchases a
field from a Sikrikun to pay the owner a quarter of the price (rather than
go with him to Beis-Din).
Why this figure?
(b) What will happen should the owner wish to redeem his field from the
Sikrikun after the Sikrikun has offered it to the would-be purchaser (see
(c) What did Rebbi and his specially-appointed Beis-Din decide regarding
(a) What problem do we have with the Tana's statement that there was no
Sikrikun during the time of the final battle with Titus, but there was
(b) What is the Din Sikrikun?
(c) How do we then interpret this statement? What does 'Lo Hayah Sikrikun
bi'Yehudah ba'Harugei Milchamah' then mean?
(d) Why not? On what principle is this ruling based?
(a) Rav Asi bases the opening statement in our Mishnah on the three orders
issued by Titus. The first of these was that anyone who did not kill a Jew
would himself be killed.
What would happen to anybody who killed a Jew,
(b) To which of these does the first half of the opening statement ('Lo
Hayah Sikrikun ... ') pertain?
- ... the second command?
- ... the third command?
(c) What would be the owner's reasoning in selling to the Sikrikun,
following the third command?
(a) What advice can we learn from the Pasuk in Mishlei "Ashrei Adam Mefached
Tamid ... "?
(b) That is precisely what happened in the episode of Kamtza and bar Kamtza.
Why did a certain man instruct his servant to invite Kamtza to his Se'udah,
but not bar Kamtza?
(c) What did he do when he discovered that the servant had inadvertently
mixed up the two names and invited bar Kamtza instead of Kamtza?
(d) What did bar Kamtza offer the man to be allowed to remain after he
refused his offer of ...
- ... payment for his portion?
- ... payment for half the Se'udah?
(a) What did the man then do?
Answers to questions
(b) Who was guilty of not paying heed to the above Pasuk?