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


Prepared by P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Kesuvos 36

KESUVOS 36 - This Daf has been sponsored by Gedalliah Jawitz of Wantagh, N.Y.


(a) Suggestion #1: If incestuous relations is taken literally, and secondary incestuous relations are Rabbinically prohibited relations - since the latter are permitted by Torah law, why is there no fine for them?
(b) Suggestion #2 (Version 1): Rather, incestuous relations are Chaivei Misos those punishable by death; secondary incestuous relations are those punishable by Kares - but those punishable by a Lav, there is a fine, as Shimon ha'Temani.
(c) Suggestion #2 (Version 2): Rather, incestuous relations are those punishable by death or Kares; secondary incestuous relations are those punishable by a Lav, as R. Shimon Ben Menasya.
(d) (Beraisa): A girl that does Mi'un does not receive a fine.
1. We infer, a regular minor does receive a fine!
2. This is as Chachamim, who say that there is a fine for a minor.
(e) Question: The end of the Beraisa says that there is no fine for an Ailonis.
1. This is as R. Meir, who says that only a Na'arah collects a fine - since an Ailonis goes from being a minor to a Bogeres, she gets no fine.
2. Chachamim authored the earlier part of the Beraisa, and R. Meir the end?!
(f) Suggestion #1: The whole Mishnah is as R. Meir; he holds as R. Yehudah regarding Mi'un.
1. Rejection: This is not so!
2. (Beraisa): Until when can a girl do Mi'un? R. Meir says, until she brings 2 hairs (becomes a Na'arah); R. Yehudah says, until there is more black than white.
(g) Suggestion #2: The whole Mishnah is as R. Yehudah; he holds as R. Meir regarding a minor.
1. Rejection: This is not so!
2. (Rav Yehudah): The Mishnah is as R. Meir.
i. If R. Yehudah agreed, Rav Yehudah would have said, the Mishnah is as R. Meir and R. Yehudah.
(h) Answer #1: The Tana of the Beraisa holds as R. Meir regarding a minor, and as R. Yehudah regarding Mi'un.
(i) Answer #2 (Rafram): When the Beraisa says, a girl that does Mi'un, it means a girl that could do Mi'un, i.e. a minor.
(j) Question: If so, let the Beraisa simply say, a minor!
1. This difficulty is unresolved.
(k) (Beraisa): An Ailonis does not receive a fine.
(l) Contradiction (Beraisa): A deaf or insane girl or an Ailonis receives a fine.
(m) Objection: This is easily answered - R. Meir says an Ailonis receives no fine (since she is never a Na'arah); Chachamim say she receives a fine when she is a minor!
1. Question: The one who asked the question, what did he think?
2. Answer: He merely cited this Beraisa so he could ask the following contradiction on it.
(n) Contradiction (Beraisa): There is no claim for finding one of the following not to be a virgin: a deaf or insane girl; a Bogeres; a Mukas Etz.
1. Such a claim may be made against a blind girl or an Ailonis; R. Meir says, there is no claim against a blind girl.
(o) Answer (Rav Sheshes): R. Gamliel says that an Ailonis receives a fine; R. Yehoshua says that there is no claim of virginity against her.
1. Objection: We only know that R. Gamliel believes her when she makes a claim - would he believe her even when she makes no claim?
2. Answer: Yes! Since her claim would be believed, in such a case we suggest this to her.
(a) (Beraisa): There is no claim of non-virginity against a Bogeres.
(b) Question: But Rav said, a Bogeres may have relations the entire first night (and any blood is attributed to virginal blood)!

(c) Answer: If no blood is found, he has a claim of non-virginity; the Beraisa teaches that if he says the opening was open, this is not a claim.
(d) (Beraisa): Sumchus says, there is no claim of non-virginity against a blind girl.
(e) (R. Zeira): This is because she falls on the ground.
(f) Question: But all girls fall!
(g) Answer: Most girls, if the see blood after falling will tell their mothers; a blind girl will not.
(h) (Beraisa): One who leaves her husband because of ill repute does not receive a fine.
(i) Question: Such a girl is stoned for adultery!
(j) Answer (Rav Sheshes): A girl of ill repute in her youth does not subsequently receive a fine.
(k) (Rav Papa): We learn from this, we do not collect with a bad document.
(l) Question: What is the case?
1. Suggestion #1: If there is a rumor that it was forged - correspondingly, there was a rumor that she had extra-marital relations.
i. Objection: But Rava taught, we are not concerned for such rumors!
2. Suggestion #2: 2 men came and said that she asked them to have relations with her; correspondingly, 2 men said that the bearer of the document asked them to forge it for him.
3. Objection: The comparison is faulty - there are many that would agree to relations, but do we suspect Jews of forgery?
4. Answer: Since he was trying to forge it, we are concerned that he forged it himself.
(a) (Mishnah): These girls do not receive a fine:
1. A convert/captive/slave that converted/was redeemed/was freed above the age of 3 years; R. Yehudah says, a redeemed captive retains her sanctity (is assumed to still be a virgin), even if she is older;
2. One who has relations with his daughter, granddaughter, wife's daughter, or wife's granddaughter does not pay a fine, since he is liable to die;
(b) Anyone liable to die does not pay money - "If there is no fatality, he will be punished monetarily".
(c) (Gemara - R. Yochanan): R. Yehudah and R. Dosa said the same law.
1. R. Yehudah's law is in our Mishnah.
2. (Beraisa - R. Dosa): A woman that was taken captive may eat Trumah.
i. Because this captor pushed her around, she should be disqualified from Kehunah?!
(d) Objection (Rabah): Perhaps they argue on each other!
1. R. Yehudah only said here that she retains her sanctity, so one who rapes or entices her will not profit - but he could hold as Chachamim of R. Dosa that disqualify her from Kehunah!
2. R. Dosa only permitted her to eat Rabbinic Trumah - but regarding the fine of the Torah, he could hold that she does not collect it!
(e) Question (Abaye): Is the reason of R. Yehudah so that a sinner should not profit?
1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): A captured girl retains her sanctity; even if she was 10 years old, her Kesuvah is 200.
2. We cannot say the reason is so a sinner should not profit!
(f) Answer: The reason is, so people should not refrain from marrying her.
(g) Question: Does R. Yehudah really hold that she retains her sanctity?
1. (Beraisa): (A Kohen) who redeems a captive may marry her; if he testifies that she was not defiled, he may not marry her; R. Yehudah says, in either case he may not marry her.
2. Question: This is illogical - if he can marry her when he redeems her, now that he testifies to her purity, he cannot?!
3. Answer: When he redeems *and* testifies about her, he may marry her; if he only testifies about her, no.
i. Still, the opinion of R. Yehudah contradicts his opinion in our Mishnah.
(h) Answer #1 (Rav Papa): Correct the Beraisa to say, R. Yehudah says, in either case he may marry her.
(i) Answer #2 (Rav Huna Brei d'Rav Yehoshua): Do not change the text. R. Yehudah addresses Chachamim according to their opinion.
1. R. Yehudah: I hold, in either case he may marry her; you should hold, in either case he may not marry her!
2. Chachamim hold, a man would not waste his money - he would not redeem her unless he is sure she is pure.
(j) If he only testifies about her, we suspect he merely desires her.
Next daf


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