REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kesuvos 101
(a) According to Rebbi Eliezer, the sole regard in which the marriage of a
Ketanah (married off by her mother or brothers) is considered valid - is
that she requires Miy'un.
What does Rebbi Yehoshua say? In which sole
regard is she not considered his full-fledged wife?
(b) How do we initially establish their Machlokes, by connecting it to that
of Rav and Shmuel?
(c) We conclude however, that, according to Rebbi Eliezer, everyone agrees.
What does this mean?
(d) In fact, Rav and Shmuel are arguing about how to interpret Rebbi
Yehoshua. Shmuel, who holds that the marriage of a Ketanah who goes out with
a Get *is valid*, will certainly hold like Rebbi Yehoshua.
How will Rav,
who holds that it *is not*, reconcile his opinion with that of Rebbi
(a) Why is 'Nechsei Tzon Barzel' called by that name?
(b) Rav Huna bar Chiya cites Rav Kahana in the name of Shmuel regarding the
worn-out clothes, which, according to the Tana of our Mishnah, the three
women do not receive.
What distinction does he make in this regard between
Nechsei mi'Kug and Nechsei Tzon Barzel?
(c) Rav Papa queries this however. Why can it not refer to the case of
Mema'enes when the clothes ...
(d) And why can it not refer to the case of Aylonis when the clothes are no
longer available (given that, when they are, she will receive them in either
case, since there is no reason to penalize her)?
- ... are available? Why should she receive them either way?
- ... are not available? Why should she not receive them in the case of Nechsei Tzon Barzel? ...
- ... Nechsei mi'Lug?
(a) We therefore conclude that Rav Kahana in the name of Shmuel was
referring to the case of Sh'niyah 've'Kansu Rabbanan le'Dideih be'Didah,
What does this mean? Why did Chazal differentiate
in this way?
(b) Rav Shimi bar Ashi learns from an inference from Rav Kahana's Din that a
coat is considered the principle (and not Peiros). From where does he
(c) What are the ramifications of Rav Shimi bar Ashi's statement?
(d) How do we reconcile this with Rav Nachman, who considers a coat Peiros,
and the husband is permitted to wear it?
(a) Shmuel qualifies our Mishnah.
Answers to questions
What does he say regarding the three
women in our Mishnah?
(b) The Beraisa substantiates Shmuel.
What does the Tana say regarding
women about whom Chazal said ...
(c) What category of women does the latter comprise?
- ... 'Ein Lahen Kesuvah'?
- ... 'Yotz'os she'Lo bi'Kesuvah'?
(a) And what does the Tana of the Beraisa (as well as Rav Huna) say about a
woman who goes out because she committed adultery?
(b) What did Rav Nachman say to the Beraisa expert who quoting a Beraisa,
stated 'Zinsah, Hifsidah Bela'osehah Kayamin'?
(c) Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan (who agrees in principle with
the current opinion) establishes the Beraisa as it stands, like Rebbi
What does 'S'timta'ah' mean?
(d) How does Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan conclude his
(a) What did Rav Huna mean when he referred to an Aylonis as an 'Ishah
ve'Einah Ishah', and an Almanah as an 'Ishah Gemurah'?
(b) What does Rav Yehudah say?
(a) What does the Tana of the Beraisa mean when he says 'Kansah be'Chezkas
she'Hi Chein, ve'Hi Chein, Yesh Lah Kesuvah'?
(b) What do we infer from there? On whom does this pose a Kashya?
(c) Why can we not answer by changing the inference to 'Ha Kansah be'Chezkas
she'Einah Kein (that they told him initially that she was a Besulah)
ve'Nimtzeis she'Hi Chein (an Almanah), Ein Lah Kesuvah' (but S'tam, she
(a) We also have another Beraisa, which specifically states 'Kansah S'tam,
Ein Lah Kesuvah', proving Rav Huna wrong.
***** Hadran Alach Almanah Nizones *****
What is it in the presentation
of the Mishnah which prompted Rav Huna's mistake?
(b) So how do we know that the same distinction that applies to Aylonis,
applies to Almanah?
***** Perek ha'Nosei *****
(a) A husband undertakes to feed his wife's daughter for five years. He then
divorces her within the five-year period, she remarries and her second
husband makes the same undertaking.
Is the first husband still obligated
to fulfill his undertaking?
(b) If the mother and daughter live far away, on whom lies the onus of
(c) Are the two husbands permitted to take turns to feed her, one month the
one, and one month, the other?
(d) So what do they do ...
- ... under the current circumstances? Why does the daughter need two sets of Mezonos?
- ... in the event that the daughter then marries (still within the five-year period)?
(a) What would an astute husband add to the condition when he got married,
to avoid the problem of having to provide his wife's daughter with Mezonos
should they move to another town?
(b) What happens if both husbands die? What distinction will then be made
between the way that their daughter is fed and the way that her daughter is
(c) Why is that?
(a) What will be the Din if someone admits that he owes his friend money in
the presence of two ...
Answers to questions
(b) In which case then, do Rebbi Yochanan (who says that if someone admits
to owing his friend a Manah, he is Chayav) and Resh Lakish (who says that he
is not), argue?
- ... designated witnesses?
- ... witnesses whom he did not designate?
(c) According to Rebbi Yochanan, may he claim even from Meshubadim, or is
his claim confined to B'nei Chorin?
(d) How do we reconcile Resh Lakish's opinion with the Mishnah in ha'Ishah
she'Nisarmelah 'Hotzi Alav K'sav Yado she'Hu Chayav Lo, Govah mi'Nechasim