POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Kesuvos 73
8) WHEN DOES A MAN FORGO HIS CONDITION?
(a) (Abaye): Rav's reason is not because we say that he
pardoned the condition since he did not mention it at the
time of Nisu'in.
1. Rather, a person does not have relations out of
wedlock (so he intended that the relations make
(b) Question: Rav and Shmuel already argued on this point
1. An orphaned minor that did not do Mi'un, became an
adult, and married another man - Rav says, she does
not need a Get from the 2nd man;
(c) Answer: It was needed to hear their dispute in both
2. Shmuel: She needs a Get from the 2nd man.
1. If we only heard their dispute by the minor - one
would think, there Rav said that she needs no Get,
since her 1st husband did not make a condition
(therefore, he wants his relations to make
engagement); in our case, he is insistent on his
condition, and Rav would admit to Shmuel!
(d) (Mishnah): If he had Chupah without mentioning any
condition, and she is found to have vows - she leaves
without a Kesuvah.
2. If we only heard their dispute here - one would
think, here Shmuel said that she needs no Get, since
he made a condition (therefore, he does not want his
relations to make engagement); by the minor, there
is no condition, and Shmuel would admit to Rav!
1. We infer, without a Kesuvah, but she needs a Get.
2. Suggestion: The case is, he engaged her on
condition, and did not mention it at the Nisu'in -
9) THE DISPUTE OF RAV AND SHMUEL
3. Answer: No, he did not specify at the engagement nor
at the Nisu'in.
(e) Answer: The Mishnah teaches this, this is how to read it:
A man engages a woman on condition that she has no vows,
and did Nisu'in without mentioning anything, it is found
that she has vows - she is not engaged;
4. Question: But if he engaged her on condition, and
did not mention it at the Nisu'in she would not need
i. If so, instead of teaching, 'A man engages a
woman on condition that she has no vows, and it
is found that she has vows - she is not
engaged' - teach a bigger Chidush, if he did
Nisu'in without specifying, and she is found to
have vows - she is not engaged, all the more so
if he only engaged her!
(f) If he engaged her and did Nisu'in without specifying, and
she is found to have vows - she leaves without a Kesuvah.
1. A Kesuvah she does not get, but she needs a Get.
(g) Question: Why do we distinguish - she does not need a
Get, because he may say, I do not want a vowing wife - if
so, she should not need a Get either!
(h) Answer #1(Rabah): She only needs a Get mi'Derabanan.
(i) Answer #2 (Rava): The Tana is unsure if she is engaged.
Regarding money, we are lenient (he does not pay a
Kesuvah); regarding prohibitions, we are stringent, and
she needs a Get.
(a) Question (Abaye): But the Mishnah is a case of 1 woman,
and we asked a question against Shmuel from the Mishnah!
10) MARRIAGE OF A MINOR
(b) (Rabah): Rav and Shmuel argue by a mistake involving 2
women; but by a mistake by 1 woman, all agree that no Get
(c) Correction (Rabah): Rav and Shmuel argue by a mistake
involving 1 woman like the case of 2 women; but by a
simple mistake by 1 woman, all agree that no Get is
(d) Question (Abaye - Beraisa): A man engaged a woman in
error, or with less than a Prutah, or when he was a
minor; even if he later sent pre-nuptial gifts, she is
not engaged, since he relied on the initial engagement
(and did not intend that these gifts should make
(e) If he had relations with her, he acquired her; R. Shimon
Bar Yehudah says, he did not acquire her.
1. This is like the case of 1 woman, and Tana'im argue!
(f) Answer: No, the error was, he engaged her with less than
2. Suggestion: The error of engagement was that he
thought she had no vows.
(g) Objection: But that case is explicitly given in the
(h) Answer: The Beraisa speaks out the case of an error: A
man engaged a woman in error - for example, with less
than a Prutah.
(i) Question: On what do the Tana'im argue?
(j) Answer: The 1st Tana holds, a man knows that engagement
does not take effect on less than a Prutah; when he had
relations, he intended that they should make engagement;
R. Shimon Ben Yehudah holds, a man does not know that
engagement does not take effect on less than a Prutah;
when he had relations, he assumed he already was engaged,
and did not intend to acquire her.
(k) Question (Beraisa): 'I will have relations with you to
engage you, on condition that father will want this' -
even if the father does not want, she is engaged; R.
Shimon Ben Yehudah says, engagement takes effect only if
the father wants.
1. This is as an error by 1 woman, and Tana'im argue!
(l) Answer: The argument is on what is meant by 'if father
1. The 1st Tana holds, it means that he will be quiet
(not object); R. Shimon Ben Yehudah says, it means
that he will say that he approves.
(a) Question (Beraisa): A girl (a minor) was married off by
her father and divorced. She is as an orphan in the life
of her father. She remarried her ex-husband. (If he dies
without children), Chachamim admit to R. Eliezer that she
does Chalitzah but not Yibum, since she was fully
divorced, but not fully remarried;
(b) This only applies when she was divorced and remarried as
a minor; but if she was divorced as a minor and remarried
as an adult, or divorced as a minor and remarried as a
minor and she became an adult before he dies, she may do
Chalitzah or Yibum; R. Eliezer says, she may only do