ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kidushin 49
KIDUSHIN 49-50 - sponsored by a generous grant from an anonymous donor. Kollel Iyun Hadaf is indebted to him for his encouragement and support and prays that Hashem will repay him in kind.
Abaye equates the opinions of Rebbi Shimon, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel and
Rebbi Elazar with regard to the principle - 'Mar'eh Makom Hu Lo'.
(a) A Get Mekushar differs from a Get Pashut - inasmuch as the Get begins
with a blank line and that (at least three or four times) one leaves every
second line of the Sh'tar blank. The witnesses are obligated to sign at the
back of each blank space, and one then folds the blank line over the next
line of writing. Each fold is subsequently stitched.
(b) Chazal instituted a Get Mekushar - for the benefit of the Kohanim, who
tended to be short-tempered, and would sometimes divorce their wives
hastily. Then, when their tempers had cooled down, they would be sorry, too
late, since they could no longer take them back. So Chazal instituted a Get
Mekushar, which would take a long time to write, providing them with the
required cooling down period, during which they could retract.
(c) The Tana Kama of the Mishnah in Bava Basra invalidates a Get Pashut
whose witnesses signed on the outside and a Get Mekushar whose witnesses
signed on the inside. According to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel - if the
witnesses signed on the inside of a Get Mekushar, the Get is Kasher, since
all that is needed is not to stitch the folds and it will become a Get
Pashut (nor will the blank spaces invalidate the Get - see Tosfos DH
(d) The Rabbanan disagree with Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel. In their opinion -
a Get Mekushar cannot become a Get Pashut, because they a Get Mekushar was
dated for the following year, and a Get Pashut, for the current one.
(a) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel rules 'ha'Kol ke'Minhag ha'Medinah'. The
problem with understanding this literally is - that 'ha'Kol ke'Minhag
ha'Medinah' is generally an accepted principle, and there are no grounds for
the Rabbanan to disagree.
(b) Consequently, in a case where the Minhag ha'Medinah is to write a Get
Pashut and the Sheli'ach wrote a Get Mekushar or vice-versa, and gave it to
the woman - the Get will be Pasul.
(c) Rav Ashi (or Abaye) establishes the dispute between the Tana Kama and
Raban Shimon ben Gamliel - in a case where both Minhagim are prevalent, and
the man instructed the Sheli'ach to write a Get Pashut. The Rabbanan hold
that he meant exactly what he said, and that if the Sheli'ach subsequently
writes a Get Mekushar, it is invalid; whereas according to Raban Shimon ben
Gamliel, it is Kasher, because of the principle 'Mar'eh Makom Hu Lo' (seeing
as he did not contravene the Minhag).
(d) The Tana Kama in the Mishnah in Gitin rules that if a woman asks her
Sheli'ach to receive her Get from a specified place and he received it
elsewhere, she is not divorced. According to Rebbi Elazar - she is, because
(like Rabbi Shimon and Raban Shimon ben Gamliel), he holds 'Mar'eh Makom Hu
Lo', as Rava said).
(a) Rebbi Shimon ('Im Hit'ah li'Sh'vach, Mekudeshes'), speaks about Sh'vach
Mamon, says Ula, but not Sh'vach Yuchsin - if for example she agreed to
marry him on the understanding that he was a Mamzer (which is a P'sul
d'Oraysa), and he turned out to be a Nasin (from the Giv'onim, whom Yehshua
appointed as wood-choppers and water-drawers, and whom David subsequently
forbade to marry into the community).
(b) The reason for this is - because we assume that she specifically wanted
him to be a Mamzer, so that he should be humble, and not treat her with
(c) We cite a Beraisa in support of Ula. Rav Ashi proves it further from the
Seifa of our Mishnah (on the following Amud) 'al-M'nas she'Ani Kohen,
ve'Nimtza Levi ... , Nasin ve'Nimtza Mamzer ... ' - from the fact that Rebbi
Shimon doesn't argue with this.
(a) Mar bar Rav Ashi counters his father's proof from the Seifa, which also
inserts the case 'al-M'nas she'Yesh Li Bas O Shifchah Megudeles, ve'Ein Lo
... *al-M'nas she'Ein Lo ve'Yesh Lo*', which is a case of Sh'vach Mamon
(where we know that Rebbi Shimon argues) from which he extrapolates that the
Tana did not find it necessary to repeat the fact that Rebbi Shimon argues,
because he has already made his point in the Reisha. In that case, it
appears that he does not differentiate between Sh'vach Mamon and Sh'vach
Yuchsin, but argues in both cases.
(b) Even assuming that 'al-M'nas she'Yesh Li Bas O Shifchah Megudeles' is
indeed Sh'vach Mamon, as Mar thought, we counter Mar Rav Ashi's counter
proof - by distinguishing between Sh'vach Mamon, where it is unnecessary to
repeat the fact that Rebbi Shimon argues, and Sh'vach Yuchsin, where, if he
does argue, the Tana should have told us so.
(c) Alternatively, we establish that case too, to be Sh'vach Yuchsin -
because 'Shifchah Megudeles' (a grown-up Shifchah) really reads as 'Shifchah
Gadeles' (an important Shifchah), whom the woman does not want, because she
will gossip with the neighbors, revealing everything she says and making her
look a fool in their eyes.
(a) According to the Tana Kama of the Beraisa, the minimum requirements for
a man who stipulates that he is a 'Karyana' are - to have Leined three
Pesukim in Shul (in those days, whoever was called up to the Torah would
(b) It is necessary to interpret Rebbi Yehudah's statement 'ad she'Yikra
vi'Yetargem' to mean that he must also have given Unklus' translation,
because Rebbi Yehudah himself stated that someone who translates Pesukim
1. ... detracting from Unklus' translation - is a liar.
(c) We confine this Halachah to someone who stipulates that he is a
'Karyana', but if he used he term 'Kara' - then he is expected to be an
expert in Torah, Nevi'im and Kesuvim.
2. ... adding to it - reviles Hashem and insults Him.
(a) According to Chizkiyah, if he stipulates that he is 'Shoneh', he must
know Halachos le'Mosheh mi'Sinai (according to the Rif, 'Shoneh' means
Mishnah). Rebbi Yochanan says - that he must know Torah (she'bi'K'sav).
(b) Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa, explains 'Mishnah' to mean Halachos (le'Moshe
mi'Sinai). Rebbi Yehudah says Medrash - meaning Sifra (on Vayikra) and Sifri
(on Bamidbar and Devarim).
(c) We reconcile Rebbi Yochanan with the Beraisa - by interpreting Torah to
mean Medrash Torah.
(d) 'Shoneh' is equivalent to 'Tanina'. If he stipulates 'al M'nas she'Ani
Tana' - he is expected to know Halachos, Sifra, Sifri and Tosefta.
(a) A man who stipulates that he is ...
1. ... a Talmid - is expected to be able to quote a Halachah in whichever
Masechta he is learning (even if he is currently learning Maseches Kalah).
(b) Those who are quoted as being ...
2. ... a Chacham - is expected to be able to say a Sevara to explain what he
3. ... strong - is expected to be instil fear into the hearts of his
4. ... a wealthy man - is expected to be sufficiently wealthy for the people
of his town to honor him for his wealth.
1. ... the ideal Talmidim are - ben Azai and ben Zoma (When ben Azai died,
Chazal say in Sotah, diligence died with him).
(c) The woman is (Safek) betrothed if the man stipulated that he was ...
2. ... the Chachmei Yavneh are - Rebbi Akiva and his colleagues.
3. ... the epitome of strength are - Avner ben Ner and Yo'av ben Tzeruyah?
1. ... a Tzadik, and turned out to be a Rasha - because he may have done
(d) What Rebbi Elazar ben Charsum and Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah have in
common is - that they were both extremely wealthy (the former was left by
his father a thousand ships and a thousand towns, the latter would Ma'aser
twelve thousand calves from his herd each year).
2. ... a Rasha, and turned out to be a Tzadik - because he may have had
idolatrous thoughts in his heart (of which nobody was aware).
(a) Nine of the ten Kabin of wisdom that came into the world went to Eretz
Yisrael, and of beauty, to Yerushalayim. Nine tenths of ...
1. ... the world's wealth - was taken by Rome.
(b) We reconcile this with Rebbi Yochanan, who, explaining a Pasuk, states
that flattery and conceit went to Bavel - by pointing out that, although
conceit initially went to Bavel, it moved on from there to Eilam.
2. ... its poverty - by Bavel.
3. ... conceit - Eilam (neighbors of Bavel).
(c) We extrapolate this from the Lashon of the Pasuk, which, speaking about
the two women, goes on to say "Livnos *Lah* Bayis" (in the singular),
implying that one of the two (conceit) did not remain there. Alternatively
we extrapolate it from the expression "Livnos", implying that the women
wanted to build themselves a house (conceit), but did not actually do it.
(d) We say 'Si'man le'Gasus, Aniyus', in spite of the fact that poverty went
to Bavel and conceit, to Eilam - because Aniyus (in this sense, refers to
poverty in Torah ('Ein Ani Ela be'Da'as'), whereas the poverty that
prevailed in Bavel refers to physical poverty.
(a) Rebbi Yochanan connect the Pasuk "Achos Lanu Ketanah, ve'Shadayim Ein
Lah" - to Eilam, whose leaders studied Torah, but failed to teach it (like
breasts, which feed the baby milk, to which Torah is compared).
(b) The advantage in this respect, that Bavel enjoyed over Eilam was - that
they taught Torah there as well as learning it?
(c) The leaders of ...
1. ... Eilam, who did not teach Torah - were Daniel and Mordechai.
(d) If the Persians took the lion's share of strength, and the Medes, of
lice, the one who took the lion's share of ...
2. ... Bavel, who did - were Ezra (and Nechemyah).
1. ... witchcraft - was Egypt.
2. ... leprosy - was the pig.
3. ... immorality - was Arabia.
(a) When the Tana says that Meishan took the bulk of Azus that came down to
the world - he means Mamzeirus.
(b) The ones to take the bulk of ...
1. ... chatter - was the women
2. ... drunkenness - the Kushim.
3. ... sleep - the Avadim.
(a) Whether the man stipulated that he lived in a city or in a town, near
the bathhouse or far from it, or that he had children or that he didn't, and
the reverse is found to be true, the Kidushin is void. Living in a city
might be considered a disadvantage to living in a town - due to the markets,
which result in high prices, and because of the cramped space caused by the
many travelers who frequent it.
(b) Even if the woman subsequently declares that she had in mind to accept
him anyway - she will not be betrothed (because she does not have the
authority to negate his condition).
(c) If it was the woman who stipulated and the reverse is found to be true -
the Kidushin is void, just as it is when the man did.
(a) In the case of the man who sold his property with the intention of going
to live in Eretz Yisrael - something happened to prevent his trip.
(b) Despite the fact that he intended to sell it exclusively with that that
in mind, Rava did not invalidate the sale - because of the principle
'Devarim she'ba'Leiv Einam Devarim'.