REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Basra 109
(a) On what grounds do we refute the suggestion that "She'ero" comes to give
the deceased's father precedence ...
(b) If not for the proof that a daughter is on the same level as a son,
where would we have placed her on the list of precedences?
- ... over his daughter (but not over his son from "ha'Karov")?
- ... over his father's brother?
(c) So what do we finally learn from "She'ero"? Why would we have thought
(a) According to our current explanation, the Pesukim are written in the
How is that?
(b) On what authority are we able to Darshen the Pesukim in the wrong order?
(c) In that case, why does the Torah need to list all the heirs? Why can it
not rely on the Pasuk "ha'Karov" which indicates the correct order of the
majority of them?
(a) In the Pasuk "ve'Ha'avartem es Nachalaso le'Bito", how does Rebbi
Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi in a Beraisa, interpret the implication of the word
Answers to questions
(b) What does it come to preclude? What does he now learn from here (rather
than from "She'ero"?
(c) On what grounds do we refute the suggestion that "Bas" comes before
"Achim" but not before "Av"?
(d) Based on the fact that, according to this Tana, "She'ero" does not refer
to the deceased's father, how does his overview of the order of heirs differ
radically with that of the previous Tana?
(a) What does Rebbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi learn from "She'ero"?
(b) What is the basic translation of "She'ero", according to him?
(c) The first Tana, on the other hand, explains "ve'Ha'avartem" like Rebbi.
What does Rebbi learn from the fact that by all other relatives, the Torah
writes "u'Nesatem", and by Bas, "ve'Ha'avartem"?
(a) According to the first Tana, what do we learn from the Pasuk in
Acharei-Mos "She'er Avicha Hi"?
(b) And in view of the Pasuk there "Ki She'er Imcha Hi", what does Rava
learn from the Pasuk ...
- ... "*mi'Mishpachto*, ve'Yarash Osah" (Pinchas)?
- ... "le'Mishpechosam le'Veis Avosam" (Bamidbar)?
(a) We query this last D'rashah from the Pasuk in Sefer Shoftim, which
writes (in connection with Pesel [the image of] Michah) "Vayehi Na'ar ...
mi'Mishpachas Yehudah, ve'Hu Levi".
How do we initially attempt to resolve
the discrepancy between "Beis-Lechem Yehudah and "ve'Hu Levi"?
(b) What is then the problem?
(c) How does Rava bar Rav Chanan explain "ve'Hu Levi", thereby resolving the
(d) If he was not even a Levi maternally, how will we explain the boast of
his 'employer', who proudly exclaimed that G-d had done him a good turn by
providing him with a Levi as a Kohen?
(a) The Sugya makes a strange twist however, concluding that he was a
hundred per cent Levi.
What was the man's real name?
(b) Why is the 'Nun' in Menasheh 'hanging'?
(c) Then why does the Navi write ...
- ... "ben Menasheh"?
- ... "mi'Mishpachas Yehudah"?
(a) What principle does Rebbi Yochanan Mishum Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai learn
from the previous two statements?
(b) How Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina learn it from the Pasuk in Melachim
(with regard to Adoniyah, son of David) "ve'Gam Hu Tov To'ar Me'od, ve'Oso
Yaldah Achar Avshalom"?
(c) What is otherwise strange about this Pasuk?
(a) What did Moshe's marriage have to do with Yonasan becoming an idolater?
We conclude however, that Pinchas descended from Yisro too.
(b) What does Rebbi Elazar say about the contrast between Yonasan ben
Gershom and Pinchas ben Elazar ben Aharon ha'Kohen?
(c) We query this however, from the Pasuk "ve'Elazar ben Aharon Lakach Lo
mi'Benos Putiel Lo le'Ishah".
How do we initially interpret "mi'Benos
Puti'el"? How does this clash with what Rebbi Elazar just said?
(d) How do we attempt to resolve this? To whom else might "mi'Benos Putiel"
What did the
tribes say about Pinchas that proves this to have been the case?
(a) So how do we finally explain "mi'Benos Putiel"? From whom did Pinchas
descend on his mother's side?
Answers to questions
(b) How does this vindicate Rebbi Elazar's statement about choosing the
family into which one marries?
(c) How do we know that the wife of Elazar was not actually the daughter of
(d) How do we prove this interpretation of "mi'Benos Putiel" from the actual