(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

Kesuvos 87

KESUVOS 87 - Sponsored anonymously in honor of Yakir and Mira Wachstock, in honor of their upcoming marriage.


(a) According to Rav Yehudah Amar Rav, the Shevu'ah from which he exempts her in our Mishnah is that of an administrator or of a store-keeper during her husband's lifetime.
What does Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah say?

(b) Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah certainly agrees with Rav Yehudah Amar Rav.
On what grounds does Rav Yehudah Amar Rav disagree with Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah?

(c) What does Rav Mordechai ask on Rav Yehudah Amar Rav? Why does is seem logical to be faced with the exemption from the Shevu'ah of 'Pogemes K'suvasah', but not from that of her Apotropsus.

(a) Rav Ashi agreed with Rav Mordechai. In his opinion, Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah refers to the Reisha of the Mishnah, like before. Rav Yehudah Amar Rav however, pertains to the Seifa ('Halchah mi'Kever Ba'alah ... Ein ha'Yorshin Mashbi'in Osah') which specifically speaks about the Shevu'ah of administration, but regarding the past.
What does Rav Yehudah Amar Rav now come to teach us by establishing the Mishnah by a woman who was appointed an administrator during her husband's lifetime?

(b) Rav Masna. who disagrees with him, bases his opinion on a statement by the Neherda'i.
What did the Neherda'i say about Karga (the king's head-tax for the orphans), Mezoni and Kevurah?

(c) Whose Mezonos were the Neherda'i referring to?

(d) What does this have to do with not making the widow swear on her transactions between her husband's death and his burial? How did Rav Masna learn the one from the other?

(a) How does Rabah Amar Rebbi Chiya qualify our Mishnah, which permits the husband's heirs to demand a Shevu'ah from her even after he exempted her?

(b) Rav Yosef Amar Rebbi Chiya disagrees. What does *he* say about 'Naki Neder Naki Shevu'ah'? How does he interpret 'Naki ... '?

(c) Rebbi Zakai sent Mar Ukva a third opinion. He makes no distinction between 'Lo Neder ... ' and 'Naki Neder ... '.
What distinction *does* he make between 'mi'Nechasai' and 'mi'Nichsaya Ilein'?

(a) Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel cites a fourth opinion in the name of Aba Shaul ben Eima Miriam, who holds that, strictly speaking, whichever Lashon he uses, she ought to be exempt from a Shevu'ah whether it is he who demands it or his heirs.
Why then, is this not the Halachah?

(b) According to the second Lashon, Aba Shaul ben Eima Miriam is quoted directly in a Beraisa, and not by Amora'im.
What is Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel's final comment?

(a) A Pogemes K'suvasah requires a Shevu'ah (as we learned above), and so does a woman who claims and one witness testifies that it is already paid. In which other two cases (besides a woman who claims from the orphans) will a woman who claims her Kesuvah require a Shevu'ah?

(b) What is the case of 'ha'Pogemes K'suvasah'?

(c) Why can a woman who claims from Nechasim Meshubadim not claim without a Shevu'ah?

(d) Why is she not automatically obligated to swear when claiming her Kesuvah from her husband?

Answers to questions


6) What does Rebbi Shimon say? When, according to him, can the heirs make her swear and when can they not?


(a) Rami bar Chama thought that the Shevu'ah of 'ha'Pogemes K'suvasah' is a Shevu'ah d'Oraysa.
Why did he think so?

(b) What would be the ramifications if it was?

(c) Rava pointed out to him that for two reasons, it cannot be a Shevu'ah d'Oraysa: one, because min ha'Torah, it is always the defendant who swears, and not the plaintiff.
What is the other?

(d) So why did the Rabbanan institute a Shevu'ah here?

8) Seeing as the woman will have to swear anyway, should her husband request an oath, claiming that she has already received her Kesuvah, what is the Chidush of 'ha'Pogemes K'suvasah'?


(a) The B'nei Yeshivah asked whether a 'Pogemes K'suvasah' with witnesses will need to swear, when she ultimately claims the rest.
What are the two sides of the She'eilah?

(b) How do we try to resolve the She'eilah from the Mishnah in Shevu'os, which lists 'ha'Pogem Sh'taro she'Lo be'Eidim' among those who swear and take?

(c) Why in fact, is there no proof from there? Why might we have thought that 'Pogemes K'suvasah' without witnesses is better than with them?

(a) The list of those who swear and take includes a hired worker, someone who is claiming from a thief, a man who is claiming from the man who wounded him, someone whose opponent is suspect of swearing falsely and a storekeeper and his ledger.
The reason that governs two of the three middle cases is because the defendant is suspect of swearing falsely.
Why do we switch the Shevu'ah to the claimant in the first and last cases?

(b) What is the case of ...

  1. ... someone who is claiming from a thief?
  2. ... the storekeeper and his ledger?
(c) Who swears in this latter case?
(a) Why might a woman who is Pogemes K'suvasah in small amounts of less than a Perutah at a time, later ...
  1. ... be permitted to claim the rest without a Shevu'ah?
  2. ... still require a Shevu'ah, notwithstanding her scrupulous care for all the details?
(b) We ask whether a 'Pocheses K'suvasah' also requires a Shevu'ah.
What is a 'Pocheses K'suvasah'?

(c) Based on the ruling of a Beraisa, we conclude that she does not require a Shevu'ah. Why not?

(d) Seeing as she herself seems to admits that the Sh'tar (containing two Manah) with which she is claiming the Manah is false, on what basis does she receive anything at all?

(a) We initially think that the Shevu'ah in the case in our Mishnah 'Eid Echad Me'idah she'Hi Peru'ah' is a Shevu'ah d'Oraysa.
Why is that?

(b) We conclude, on the same grounds as in the previous case (of ha'Pogemes K'suvasah), that it cannot be a Shevu'ah d'Oraysa.
Why did the Rabbanan then institute a Shevu'ah here?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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