(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Gitin 35

GITIN 34 & 35 - The Dafim have been 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) Rav Kahana (or Rav Yehudah Amar Rav) related the story of a man who, during a time of famine, deposited with a certain widow a golden Dinar, which she placed inside a jar of flour. She subsequently ..
1. ... baked the flour into a loaf.
2. ... took a vow (in the course of the Shakla ve'Tarya) when he claimed his golden Dinar - that if she had derived any benefit from the golden Dinar, one of her children should die.
(b) Not long afterwards - one of her sons died?

(c) Despite the fact that she did not use the coin, she was nevertheless punished - because whe had benefttted from it indirectly, by saving herself as much flour as would have fitted into the space taken up by the golden Dinar.

(a) When the Chachamim heard this story, they declared - that if that is what happens to someone who swears in truth, imagine what happens to someone who swears falsely!

(b) Seeing as she did not really swear truly, when the Chachamim said 'u'Mai Mi she'Nishba be'Emes', they meant - 'ke'Mi she'Nishba be'Emes' (because she did not intend to swear falsely).

(a) This not seem to be the source of the Batei-Dinim refraining from enforcing the Shevu'ah that an Almanah made to the Yesomim when she claimed her Kesuvah, because, if it was - why did Rebbi Zeira Amar Shmuel confine it to an Almanah any more than to a Gerushah?

(b) The reason that he did is - because widows tended to take liberties, thinking that because they looked after the Yesomim's affairs, they were entitled to a little of their property without having to give Din ve'Cheshbon on what they took.

(c) Rav and Shmuel both stated that it is only in Beis-Din that they would not enforce the Shevu'ah, but outside Bes-Din, they would. The basic difference between a Shevu'ah that is made in Beis-Din and one that is made outside Beis-Din is - that the former is a Shevu'ah d'Oraysa, which entailed an object of Mitzvah (such as a Sefer Torah or Tefilin in one's hand whilst taking it).

(d) The reason for Rav and Shmuel's distinction regarding the Shevu'ah the Almanah makes to the Yesomim - is due to the stringency of a Shevu'ah d'Oraysa (whose transgression is more serious than that of a Shevu'ah de'Rabbanan.

(a) It is according to the text in Sura that both Rav and Shmuel concurred in the previous ruling. However, this creates a discrepancy with another ruling of Rav - who stopped Almanos from claiming their Kesuvah altogether.

(b) The text of that statement in Neherda'a, which resolves the discrepancy is - Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel Lo Shanu ... ve'Rav Amar Afilu Chutz le'Beis-Din Nami Ein Mashbi'in Osah'.

(c) Rav did not apply Raban Gamliel's concession of attaching the Shevu'ah to a Neder - because in his time, people tended to be lax with regard to Nedarim, too (which was not the case in our Mishnah).

(a) Based on Rav's custom not to claim the Kesuvah of an Almanah, Rav Yehudah refused to accept the claim of a certain widow who wanted her Kesuvah. When she swore that she had not received anything from her Kesuvah - he said that Rav only declined to make her swear, but if she swore of her own accord (as this woman had done), she could claim her Kesuvah.

(b) Rabah bar Rav Huna refused to accept the claim of a certain widow on the grounds that neither Rav nor his father did so (as we have just explained). When she asked whether she could not at least receive Mezonos, he cited the opinion of Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel, who said - that a woman who claims her Kesuvah in Beis-Din, does not receive Mezonos either (seeing as claiming her Kesuvah is indicative of her intention to get married, and her husband undertook to sustain her only as long as she remained a widow.

(c) They overturned his chair - to fulfill the curse of that widow (in a literal sense), who had cursed him for carrying out the Chumros of both Rav and Shmuel to all her claims, though she had meant it figuratively (that he should lose his greatness).

(d) That move was only partially effective - because he was not spared from illness.

(a) Rav Yehudah compromised on Rav's stringency. He instructed Rav Yirmiyah Bira'ah - to permit the Yesomim to make her make a Neder and make her swear outside Beis-Din (like Shmuel, who permitted widows to claim their Kesuvos).

(b) He looked forward to subsequently hearing - that this was being done, in order to establish the opinion of his Rebbi Shmuel, as opposed to the opinion of Rav and his disciples.

(a) The divorcee of Acha bar Heidaya, who lived in Eretz Yisroel made a Neder forbidding all fruits on herself if she received more than a small percentage of her Kesuvah. Ayeh Mari, a name that also appeared on the Get - was a nickname of Acha bar Heidaya, by which he was also known (and which had therefore to be inserted in the Get, as we learned above).

(b) Besides a heavy coat and a Sefer Tehilim - she had also already received a Sefer Iyov and a worn-out Sefer Mishlei (presumably all in scroll form).

(c) The total value of the things that she had received was - five Manah (the equivalent of five hundred Zuz).

(d) We reconcile this with Rebbi Zeira Amar Shmuel, who restricted our Mishnah, where Raban Gamliel ha'Zakein instituted attaching the Shevu'ah to a Neder to a widow, but a divorcee retained the original Din of making a Shevu'ah only (as we learned earlier) - by establishing the current case by a Get Yabmin, meaning that one of the Yevamin gave the Yevamah a Get, forbidding her on all the brothers, and she was now coming to claim her Kesuvah from her deceased husband's property.




(a) Rav Huna restricts Raban Gamliel's Takanah that a woman who claims her Kesuvah must make a Neder to the Yesomim to avoid swearing falsely, to a woman who has not already remarried - because, once she is married, she will swear falsely that she not yet received her Kesuvah, and make the required Neder, secure in the knowledge that her husband will annul it for her.

(b) We are not worried however, that ...

1. ... even if, when she makes the Neder, she is not yet married, she relies on the fact that, when she does remarry, her husband will annul the Neder that she made prior to the marriage - because a husband cannot annul Nedarim that his wife made before they were married.
2. ... she will go to a Chacham to have the Neder revoked - because Rav Huna holds that the Noder is obligated to provide the Chacham with all the details of the Neder that he wants revoked. Consequently, he is bound to refuse to revoke the Neder in question, once he sees that it was Beis-Din who obligated her to make it.
(a) Rav Nachman disagrees with Rav Huna. According to him, the woman makes the Neder required of her by the Yesomim even if she has already remarried - because he holds that the Noder is not obligated to provide the Chacham with all the details of the Neder that he wants revoked.

(b) He avoids the problem of the woman relying on her husband annulling the Neder - by forcing her to make a Neder be'Rabim (i.e. in front of ten people), which in his opinion, cannot be revoked.

(c) Rav Nachman explains the Beraisa, which states ...

1. ... 'Niseis, Govah Kesuvasah Im Nadrah' - to mean that she makes the Neder only if she is not yet married.
2. ... 'Niseis, Noderes ve'Govah Kesuvasah', which clearly clashes with his interpretation of the previous Beraisa - by making whether or not, a Neder be'Rabim can be revoked, a Machlokes Tana'im.
(a) Rav Nachman and Rav Papa argue over whether someone who goes to a Chacham to have his Neder revoked needs to specify his Neder or not. Rav Papa's reason for saying that one does not is - because then, the Noder will simply omit whatever suits him, and leave the Chacham to revoke the Neder the way he puts it to him.

(b) Rav Papa's reason for saying that one does is - because sometimes (such as in our case) the Noder's Neder is attached to an Isur, and, by suppressing part of the information, he hopes that the Chacham will revoke his Neder so that he can transgress the Isur.

(a) The Mishnah in Bechoros says that a Kohen who marries women who are forbidden to him (such as a divorcee) - is Pasul to perform the Avodah until he makes a Neder forbidding the forbidden women on himself (because people took Nedarim more seriously, it seems, than Isurim that are imposed by Hashem).

(b) According to Rav Nachman, we are not afraid that he will simply go to a Chacham to have his Neder revoked, because he has to make a Neder 'be'Rabim. According to those who permit a Neder be'Rabim to be rescinded - we force him to make a Neder 'al-Da'as Rabim', which everybody agrees, cannot be rescinded.

(c) A Neder 'al-Da'as Rabim' - is one where the Noder states that he is declaring the Neder according to the Beis-Din's intentions.

(d) A Neder she'Hudar al-Da'as Rabim can however, be rescinded - if it is for a D'var Mitzvah (as we shall now see).

12) The reason that ...
1. ... Rav Acha deposed a certain children's Rebbe with a Neder al-Da'as Rabim that he would never teach children again is - because he was too strict with them (hitting them excessively when they misbehaved).
2. ... Ravina revoke that Neder is - because there was nobody who could match his competence in teaching children (he took meticulous care to transmit the text accurately).
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,