REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kesuvos 90
If a father marries off a son who is a Katan, or if a Nochri wrote his wife
a Kesuvah, and then converted together with her, both women still receive
their Kesuvos, even after the one grows-up and the other converts.
(a) According to Rav Huna, they only receive the Manah, Masayim, but not the
Tosefes that he inserted in the original Kesuvah.
***** Hadran Alach ha'Kosev le'Ishto *****
What does Rav Yehudah
(b) What does the Tana of the Beraisa mean when he says 'Chidshu, Noteles
(c) The Beraisa, as it stands, implies that they do not however, receive any
Tosefes that he added before their status changed.
How does Rav Yehudah
try to amend the Beraisa, to accommodate his opinion?
(d) However, the Beraisa itself continues 'Lo Chidshu, Besulah Govah
Masayim, Almanah, Manah (proving Rav Yehudah wrong).
How did Rav Yehudah
misinterpret the words in our Mishnah 'K'suvasah Kayemes' to arrive at his
***** Mi she'Hayah Nasuy *****
(a) If a man who is married to two women dies, the woman whose Kesuvah is
dated first has the first rights to the Kesuvah.
Under which circumstances
(b) Why is that?
- ... do the heirs of the first woman claim before the heirs of the second one?
- ... will the second woman and her heirs take precedence over the heirs of the first one?
(a) What do we initially infer from the Lashon of our Mishnah 'ha'Rishonah
(b) What important principle do we learn from this inference?
(c) How does the Mishnah in Bava Basra 'Ben Kodem le'Bas' refute this
(a) What does the second Lashon infer from the fact that the Tana did not
write 'Im Kadmah Sh'niyah ve'Tafsah, Ein Motzi'in mi'Yadah'?
Answers to questions
(b) We refute this inference by quoting the Seifa 'Nasa es ha'Rishonah
u'Meisah ... Sh'niyah ve'Yorshehah Kodmin le'Yorshei Rishonah'.
'Kodmin' in the Seifa not be meant literally?
(a) We learn three things from the Seifa of our Mishnah. The first of these
is that even when one of the mothers died in her husband's lifetime and the
second one, after his death, the Takanah of K'esuvas B'nin Dichrin still
What might we have otherwise thought?
(b) How do we infer this Chidush from our Mishnah?
(c) The second Chidush is based on the Tana making no mention of there being
an extra Dinar (a basic prerequisite for 'Kesuvas B'nin Dichrin to be
What do we learn from this omission?
(d) The third Chidush is that the woman's heirs cannot claim Kesuvas B'nin
Dichrin from Meshubadim.
What is ...
- ... the reason for this?
- ... the proof from our Mishnah that this is so?
(a) Rav Ashi repudiates two of the three proofs. 'Kodmin' (in the Seifa) he
argues, means that the first heirs are the first to inherit from their
father, but not because of Kesuvas B'nin Dichrin.
What problem do we have
with this from the Lashon of the Seifa of our Mishnah?
(b) How do we resolve this Kashya from ' ... *Sh'niyah ve'Yorshehah*?
(c) Even assuming that 'Kodmin' *does* refer to Kesuvas B'nin Dichrin, how
does Rav Ashi reject the proof that the second Kesuvah serves as the extra
Dinar of Yerushah? Then why does the Tana not mention it?
(a) ben Na'nes, referring to the Seifa of our Mishnah, permits the heirs of
the first wife to say to the heirs of the second one 'Take your Kesuvah and
How do we initially interpret this statement? What does 'and go'!
(b) What does Rebbi Akiva say, according to this interpretation?
(a) The Rabbanan de'Bei Rav quoted by Rabah disagree with the above
explanation. According to them, Rebbi Akiva agrees with ben Na'nes, that
Kesuvas B'nin Dichrin *does* apply to heirs of the wife who died before her
husband and heirs of the wife who died after him.
Then how do they explain
their Machlokes? What is Rebbi Akiva's reason?
(b) What did the Rabbanan de'Bei Rav mean when they added 've'Hu ha'Din
(c) What does Rabah say about 'Ba'al Chov'? Why should the case of Ba'al
Chov be better than that of the second heirs who are also creditors?
(d) How can we consider a debt (which goes to the creditor) to be the extra
Dinar of inheritance?
(a) What problem does Rav Yosef have with the Rabbanan de'Bei Rav's
interpretation of the Machlokes from the Lashon of Rebbi Akiva 'K'var
Kaftzah Nachlah Milifnei B'nei ha'Rishonah'? What should he have said,
according to Rav Yosef?
Answers to questions
(b) So how does Rav Yosef interpret the Machlokes?
(c) In another Beraisa, the Tana Kama (discussing the same case as that of
the Seifa of our Mishnah) states 'Ba'in Banehah shel Zu le'Achar Misah
ve'Notlin Kesuvas Iman'.
To which set of heirs is he referring, according
to Rav Yosef? Like which of the above Tana'im will he then hold?
(d) What does Rebbi Shimon say? Like which of the above Tana'im will he