REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kidushin 47
KIDUSHIN 46-47 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
(a) We learned in our Mishnah that, if the woman ate the dates as she
received them, they do not combine to make up a Perutah. Rava qualifies
this, by differentiating between 'be'Zu, be'Zu, be'Zu' and 'be'Eilu'.
makes 'be'Eilu' different?
(b) What does the Tana of the Beraisa rule in a case where a man said
'Hiskadshi Li ba'Alon, be'Rimon u've'Egoz', or 'Hiskadshi be'Eilu'?
(c) What is an 'Alon'? Why is it listed together with edible fruit?
(a) What is the difference between the Reisha of the Beraisa, where the man
said 'ba'Alon, be'Rimon *u've'Egoz'* (rather than 'O be'Egoz') and the Seifa
'be'Zu, be'Zu, be'Zu'?
(b) How can we establish the Reisha when he said 'be'Eilu', seeing as the
Tana then lists 'Hiskadshi Li be'Eilu' as an independent case?
(c) What does the Tana add in the Seifa that he did not include in the
(d) What does this prove?
(a) What is the problem from the previous Beraisa on Rav and Shmuel, who
established the case in our Mishnah 'Haysah Ocheles Rishonah Rishonah' on
the Reisha ('Hiskadshi Li bi'Temarah Zu, Hiskadshi Li be'Zu')? Why can we
not establish the Beraisa likewise?
(b) We answer by establishing the Tana of the Beraisa like Rebbi.
does Rebbi say?
(c) To which section of the Beraisa are we now referring?
(d) How will this explain the Beraisa according to Rav and Shmuel? Why does
the Tana present the case of Natlaso ve'Ochlaso'?
(a) Rav corroborates what we learned earlier 'ha'Mekadesh be'Milveh Einah
What is the reason for this ruling?
(b) We suggest that this is the Machlokes Tana'im in the Beraisa
'ha'Mekadesh be'Milveh Mekudeshes; ve'Yesh Omrim Einah Mekudeshes'.
is the Tana Kama's reason? If a loan is not for spending, then what is it
(c) We refute this suggestion however, on the basis of the Seifa which
refers to a sale.
What does the Seifa say?
(d) Why does the Seifa force us to retract from the previous proposal?
(a) What does Rav Nachman quoting Huna our Chaver mean when he establishes
the Beraisa in a different case? By which kind of Milveh does he establish
(b) What is then the basis of the Machlokes between the Tana Kama and Yesh
(c) What does Rebbi Elazar rule in a case where a man agrees to give a woman
a Manah, but only hands her a Dinar? How much is the discrepancy?
(d) Does this mean that Rebbi Elazar holds like Yesh Omrim?
(a) In the case where a man betrothed a woman with the Pikadon that she is
safekeeping for him, and she then discovered that it was either stolen or
lost, the Tana Kama of the Beraisa rules that she is betrothed, provided
that goods to the value of at least a Perutah remain.
Answers to questions
What does he say in
the case of a Milveh? Why the difference?
(b) What does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar in the name of Rebbi Meir say?
(c) What can we extrapolate from their words with re. to betrothing with a
(d) Why is this a Kashya on Rav?
(a) We reject the suggestion that the Rabbanan and Rebbi Meir argue over
whether 'Milveh le'Hotza'ah Nitnah' or not, because that would leave us with
a problem with the Reisha ('Hiskadshi Li be'Pikadon') where the Tana
requires at least one Perutah to remain.
What is the problem assuming that
(b) So we first amend the Beraisa and then establish it in a different case
(as we did the previous Beraisa).
- ... the woman accepted liability?
- ... she did not?
How does the case ...
(c) Rabah learned the interpretation of the Machlokes Tana'im from the
Rabbanan in Bei Rav.
- ... of Pikadon now speak? Did the woman accept responsibility or not?
- ... of Milveh now read?
What does 'Bei Rav' mean?
(a) The Rabbanan de'Bei Rav established the Machlokes by whether 'Milveh
bi'Reshus Ba'alim la'Chazarah' or not.
What does this mean? Why does Rebbi
Shimon ben Elazar in the name of Rebbi Meir ascribe to Milveh the same Din
(b) What will they hold re. 'Milveh le'Hotza'ah Nitnah'? What would be its
(c) And what did they mean when they said 've'Hu ha'Din le'Onsin?
(d) On what grounds does Rabah disagree with the latter statement? Why did
he consider it obvious that the borrower is Chayav Onsin even before he has
spent any of the money?
(a) Rav Huna rules that if someone borrows an ax for ten days, he only
acquires it from the moment he chops with it.
What are the ramifications
of Rav Huna's statement?
(b) On what grounds will even the Rabbanan of Rebbi Meir (who hold that
someone who borrows money acquires it immediately) concede this?
(a) 'ha'Omer le'Ishah Hiskadshi Li bi'Sh'tar Chov O she'Hayah Lo Milveh
be'Yad Acheirim ve'Hirshah Aleihem, Rebbi Meir Omer Mekudeshes'.
the Chachamim say?
(b) On what grounds do we initially reject the suggestion that Sh'tar Chov
means Sh'tar Chov da'Acheirim?
(c) In that case, what *does* it mean? What do we try and prove from here?
(d) How do we finally justify establishing the case of Sh'tar Chov by Sh'tar
(a) We establish the Machlokes by Sh'tar Chov as being the same Machlokes as
Rebbi and the Rabbanan. Rebbi holds 'Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah (one can
acquire an outstanding debt with nothing more than the receipt of the
What do the Rabbanan say?
(b) Alternatively, neither Rebbi Meir nor the Rabbanan hold like Rebbi (see
Tosfos DH 'de'Kuli Alma'), and they argue over Rav Papa.
What does Rav
Papa say about someone who sells a Sh'tar Chov? What is he obligated to
(c) Which Tana holds like Rav Papa?
(a) Alternatively, both Tana'im hold like Rav Papa, and they argue over
Answers to questions
On what grounds does Shmuel say that if someone sells a Sh'tar
Chov and then waives the debt, the debt is canceled?
(b) And what does he say about the heirs, in the event of the creditor's
(c) How will this now tie up with the Machlokes Tana'im, where Rebbi Meir
holds 'Hiskadshi Li bi'Sh'tar Chov, Mekudeshes', and the Chachamim, Einah