REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Yevamos 66
***** Perek Almanah le'Kohen Gadol *****
(a) What is the difference between Nechsei mi'Lug and Nechsei Tzon Barzel?
(b) Is the husband obligated to feed his wife's Avdei mi'Lug?
(c) If a Kohen Gadol marries an Almanah, Avdei Tzon Barzel are permitted to
eat Terumah, whereas Avdei mi'Lug are not.
Why is that?
(d) Is there any difference (with regard to eating Terumah) between the
Avdei mi'Lug and the Avdei Tzon Barzel of ...
- ... a bas Yisrael who married a Kohen?
- ... a bas Kohen who married a Yisrael?
(a) What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Emor ...
(b) Why do we need a Pasuk to include Eved she'Kanah Avadim"? Why do we not
just say that 'Mah she'Kanah Eved Kanah Rabo' (whatever a slave acquires,
belongs automatically to his master)?
- ... "ve'Kohen ki Yikneh Nefesh (Kinyan Kaspo) Hu Yochal Bo"?
- ... "ve'Kohen ki Yikneh Nefesh *Kinyan Kaspo* Hu Yochal Bo"?
(c) What problem does this Beraisa pose with the Avdei mi'Lug of an Almanah
le'Kohen Gadol in our Mishnah?
(d) How do we initially try to resolve this problem?
(a) In view of what we just learned, why should an Almanah le'Kohen Gadol be
any different than a Kohen who is an Areil or who is Tamei, whose Avadim are
permitted to eat, even though they themselves are not?
(b) We ask on this from a Mamzer, who is not allowed to eat, yet he causes
his grandmother to eat.
What is the case? What would be the Din if he was
not a Mamzer?
(c) Ravina answers that the Tana is not forbidding *anyone* who cannot eat
to cause others to eat, only someone who himself eats only because he is a
Kinyan. Rava disagrees; according to him, the Avdei mi'Lug of an Almanah
le'Kohen Gadol are permitted to eat Terumah min ha'Torah.
Why did the
Chachamim forbid it?
(d) Rav Ashi too, ascribes the prohibition to a Rabbinical decree.
grounds do we refute his initial suggestion, that it is because she might
continue to feed them after her husband dies?
(a) We conclude that Rav Ashi is referring to a decree whose reasoning is
confined to an Almanah who is a bas Kohen.
Answers to questions
Which decree are we talking
(b) Then why does the Tana not specifically state that the decree is
confined to an Almanah who is a bas Kohen, but not to a bas Yisrael?
(a) If a divorced woman claims back objects of Nichsei Tzon Barzel, and her
husband insists on paying her money, Rav Yehudah rules that the Din is with
Why is that?
(b) According to Rav Ami, the Din is with him.
(c) What snag does Rav Safra find with Rav Ami's reasoning in the words
'Ho'il ve'Chayav be'Achariyusan'?
(a) What does the Mishnah in Terumos say (with regards to feeding Terumah)
(b) How come that a Kohen may feed Avdei Tzon Barzel, Terumah (precisely
because he is responsible for them), whereas a Kohen who hired a cow from a
Yisrael may not?
- ... a Yisrael who hired a cow from a Kohen?
- ... a Kohen who hired a cow from a Yisrael?
(c) The Seifa of the Mishnah in Terumos, which speaks about 'Sham Parah',
conforms with our Din of Avdei Tzon Barzel.
What does 'Sham Parah' mean?
(d) What distinction does the Tana make there between Yisrael she'Sham Parah
mi'Kohen, and Kohen she'Sham Parah mi'Yisrael?
(a) At whose D'rashah were Rabah and Rav Yosef sitting when they cited
Beraisos to prove both the opinions of Rav Yehudah and of Rav Ami?
(b) What does the Beraisa that supports the opinion of ...
(c) What does the Tana add to Nichsei Tzon Barzel in this regard?
- ... Rav Ami say with regard to a husband or a wife who knocks out a tooth or who blinds the eye, of an Eved of Tzon Barzel?
- ... Rav Yehudah say with regard to the husband selling Nichsei Tzon Barzel?
(d) What did Raban Shimon ben Gamliel rule with regard to Nichsei Tzon
Barzel which one of them sold without permission from the other?
(a) On what grounds did Rav Nachman rule like Rav Yehudah (that she is
entitled to her objects in preference to cash), despite the Beraisa that
supports Rav Ami?
The above ruling of Rava conforms with his own ruling regarding the three
things that remove Shi'bud.
(b) What did Rava rule when the heirs took a coat of Nichsei Tzon Barzel
after their father's death and placed it over their dead father's body?
(c) How does this ruling appear to contradict Rava Amar Rav Nachman's
(d) In reply, Rav Kahana explained to Na'na'i (Rava's grandson) that even
Rav Yehudah would concede that, in this case, the widow would have no claim.
Why is that?
What are the three things?
Answers to questions