(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 97


(a) According to Rebbi Daniel bar Ketina Amar Rav Huna, the Almanah would sell her husband's property once a year.
What does Rav Yehudah say?

(b) They both agree though, on the manner of payment.
In how many instalments would the purchaser pay her?

(c) Each of them has the support of a Beraisa. Ameimar however, ruled like Rav Yehudah.
What did Ameimar reply when Rav Ashi quoted him Rav Huna?

(a) What did they ask Rav Sheishes regarding an Almanah who sold property (with responsibility) for Mezonos?

(b) To whom would the purchaser have turned, had a third person claimed the field from him?

(c) Then how did Rav Yosef, who asked the same She'eilah as the B'nei Yeshivah asked Rav Sheishes, explain it? Why should she not be able to claim her Kesuvah from the purchaser?

(a) Rav Sheishes resolves the She'eilah from the Mishnah that permits her to sell the property up to the amount of her Kesuvah, so that she will be able to claim her Kesuvah later ('ve'Samach Lah she'Tigbah K'suvasah min ha'Sha'ar').
How does he do this?

(b) On what basis do we reject the suggestion that the Mishnah is merely giving good advice, so that the woman should not cause herself to be labelled as someone who sells and then retracts?

(a) What She'eilah did they ask regarding someone who sells a field because he needs the money?

(b) Why is there no proof from Rav Papa, who returned a field that he had bought under exactly those circumstances?

(c) What happened in Neherda'a when, on one occasion, everyone sold their mansions because of a terrible draught, which resulted, in turn, in an acute shortage of food? Why did Rav Nachman permit everyone to retract?

(d) Why could they not resolve the She'eilah from Rav Nachman's ruling?

(a) We prove our previous statement from the discussion between Rami bar Shmuel and Rav Nachman.
What did Rav Nachman reply when Rami bar Shmuel told him that on his account, the residents of Neherda'a would no longer agree to purchase houses?

(b) What did Rami bar Shmuel retort?

(c) How does this prove that Rav Nachman's ruling must have been a question of the boats being delayed and was therefore a false sale?

(a) According to the Tana Kama, both an Almanah min ha'Eirusin and an Almanah min ha'Nisu'in have the authority to sell outside Beis-Din (without their specific authority).
What does Rebbi Shimon say about an Almanah min ha'Eirusin?

(b) Why does he make such a distinction?

Answers to questions



(a) According to Ula, the reason that the Tana Kama permits an Almanah min ha'Eirusin to sell outside Beis-Din is because of 'Chi'na'.
What does that mean?

(b) Rebbi Yochanan gives the reason because a man wants to spare his wife the embarrassment of going to Beis-Din.
What are the ramifications of their Machlokes?

(c) How will Ula establish the next Mishnah, which forbids a Gerushah to sell the property outside Beis-Din?

(d) But Rebbi Shimon has already taught us that he does not hold of the concept of Chi'na in the Reisha, where he forbade an Almanah min ha'Eirusin to sell the property outside Beis-Din? Why does he find it necessary to repeat it in the case of a Gerushah?

(a) If, in the Seifa of our Mishnah 've'Chol she'Ein Lah Mezonos, Lo Timkor Ela be'Veis-Din', Rebbi Shimon is not coming to teach us that even a Gerushah may not sell her ex-husband's property, then what *is* he coming to teach us?

(b) What did Rebbi Zeira say about a woman who is Megureshes ve'Eino Megures hes? What does 'Megureshes ve'Eino Megureshes' mean?

(c) What can we deduce from Rebbi Zeira's statement with regard to the same woman after her husband's death?

(d) What is the reason for the distinction between during her husband's lifetime and after his death?

(a) The Beraisa states that the Almanah's heirs, like herself, are permitted to sell the property outside Beis-Din.
How do we try to prove Rebbi Yochanan right from here?

(b) How did Ula succeed in reconciling the Beraisa with his explanation?

(a) The Tana Kama forbids an Almanah to sell the rest of her Kesuvah for Mezonos, once she has sold part of it, or given part to her creditor as collateral or given it away as a gift.
What do the Chachamim say?

(b) The Tana Kama is in fact, Rebbi Shimon.
What does Rebbi Shimon say?

(c) What does the Seifa of our Mishnah say about ...

  1. ... a woman who sells her deceased husband's property for Mezonos outside Beis-Din? Is this obligatory?
  2. ... a Gerushah who sells her ex-husband's property?
(d) Who is the author of the final statement according to ...
  1. ... Rebbi Yochanan ('Ein Adam Rotzeh she'Tisbazeh Ishto be'Veis-Din')?
  2. ... Ula (Chi'na)?
(a) Rebbi Shimon says that the moment the Almanah has sold some of the property, she loses Mezonos (even though some of her Kesuvah is still owing), whereas the Rabbanan say that she does not (precisely *because* it is).
What is the basis of the reasoning of ...
  1. ... Rebbi Shimon?
  2. ... the Rabbanan?
(b) Rebbi Meir, in a Beraisa, forbids a Kohen Gadol to marry a Bogeres. What do Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon say?

(c) How do we initially interpret their Machlokes?

(d) Assuming the Rabbanan in our Mishnah to be Rebbi Meir, how do we basically reconcile the Beraisa with our Mishnah?

(a) Based on the fact that Rebbi Meir interprets "Besulah" to mean a partial Besulah, what does he learn from ...
  1. ... "Besulah" *"Besulehah*"?
  2. ... "*bi*'Vesulehah"?
(b) Based on the fact that Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon interpret "Besulah" to mean a full Besulah, what do they learn from ...
  1. ... "Besulah" *"Besulehah*"?
  2. ... "*bi*'Vesulehah"?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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