ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kidushin 69
KIDUSHIN 69 - dedicated by Mr. Avi Berger of Queens, N.Y. in memory of his
parents, Pinchas ben Reb Avraham Yitzchak and Leah bas Michal Mordechai
(a) Rebbi Tarfon in our Mishnah declares that the off-spring of Mamzeirim
(who would normally remain Mamzeirim forever) can be legitimized - by the
Mamzer 'marrying' a Shifchah. The child will be an Eved, who, should his
master set him free, will be permitted to marry a Yisre'elis.
(b) According to Rebbi Eliezer - even whilst he is an Eved, he will be an
Eved Mamzer, and when he is set free, he will remain a Mamzer (and forbidden
to marry a Yisre'elis). Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel will later rule like Rebbi
(c) The Isur of 'marrying' a Shifchah would normally be - the La'av of "Lo
(d) We nevertheless ask whether Rebbi Tarfon does not permit a Mamzer to
marry a Shifchah even Lechatchilah - whether the La'av is confined to a
*Kasher* Yisrael, or whether, seeing as a Shifchah has the status of an
animal, and a Mamzer, after all, is a Yisrael, the La'av extends to him too.
(a) When the Chachamim asked Rebbi Tarfon 'Tiharta es ha'Zecharim ve'Lo
Tiharta es ha'Nekeivos' - they meant that a woman would be unlikely to
accept such advice, to move to another town and seek ways and means to
'marry' a slave in secret.
(b) We try to prove from here that Rebbi Tarfon must be speaking Bedieved -
because if he permitted it Lechatchilah, then a woman would have no more
problem doing that than a man.
(c) We refute this proof however, on the grounds that a Mamzeres would be
worse off than a Mamzer anyway (even assuming that he is permitted to
'marry' a Shifchah Lechatchilah) - because (even though the child of a
Shifchah adopts the status of his mother), this is not the case with the
child of an Eved who has no Yichus whatsoever (seeing as the Torah refers to
him as an 'Am ha'Domeh la'Chamor').
(a) Rebbi Tarfon said to his Mamzer host - that had he not been married, he
would have advised him to do something that would legalize his descendents.
(b) This proves - that Rebbi Tarfon is speaking Lechatchilah (otherwise his
belated advice would have been meaningless).
(c) We refute the counter argument, suggesting that Rebbi Tarfon might have
meant that he would have advised him to go and steal in order to be sold as
an Eved Ivri who would be permitted to live with a Shifchah Cana'anis - on
the grounds that, in the days of Rebbi Tarfon, the Din of Eved Ivri was no
longer applicable (seeing as it tied up with the Din of Yovel, which was not
then in practice - since most Jews were not living in Eretz Yisrael).
(d) Of course stealing is prohibited, and we could have eliminated the
suggestion that way, but we chose to do it by means of the Kashya that we
(a) Rebbi Eliezer learns that the child of a Mamzer and a Shifchah is an
'Eved Mamzer', from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Lo Yavo *Lo* bi'Kehal Hashem"
('Lo Halach Achar Pesulo'). Rebbi Tarfon however - establishes this Pasuk by
a Yisrael who married a Mamzeres (i.e. that the children go after her).
***** Hadran Alach ha'Omer *****
(b) We would otherwise have thought - that, in view of the Pasuk in Bamidbar
"le'Mishpechosam le'Veis Avosam", a child always goes after the father.
(c) Rebbi Eliezer counters Rebbi Tarfon's argument. If "Lo" precludes
overrides "le'Mishpechosam le'Veis Avosam", he argues - why should it not
also override "ha'Ishah vi'Yeladehah Tih'yeh la'Adonehah"?
(d) Rebbi Tarfon disagrees with him however. In his opinion one cannot
compare a Yisre'elis and a Shifchah in this regard, because in the latter
case, a fetus in the stomach of a Shifchah is comparable to one in the
stomach of an animal, so we cannot possibly go after the father (in spite of
***** Perek Asarah Yuchsin *****
(a) The four Yuchsin that need to be added to the list of Kohanim, Levi'im,
Yisre'elim, Chalalim, Geirim and Charurim, are -Mamzeirim, Nesinim, Shesukim
(b) Kohanim, Levi'im and Yisre'elim are permitted to intermarry, and so are
Levi'im, Yisre'elim, Chalalim, Geirim, Charurim. The Tana omits Kohanim from
the latter list - because a Kohen may marry neither a Chalalah (on whom
there is a La'av), nor a Giyores or a Meshuchreres (who are both assumed to
(c) The final list permits six of the above to intermarry - Geirim,
Charurim, Mamzeirim, Nesinim, Shesukim and Asufim.
(d) The Tana chose to say 'Alu mi'Bavel' rather than Alu le'Eretz Yisrael' -
corroborating Rebbi Elazar, who said in this regard that Ezra did not leave
Bavel before he had purified it like refined flour (leaving behind only
those of the purest Yichus).
1. Chalalim are - Pasul Kohanim who are born from a union of Pesulei
(b) David Hamelech issued the decree forbidding a Nasin to marry a
Yisre'elis, after the Giv'onim demonstrated that they did not have the
characteristics of a Yisrael.
2. Charurim are - synonymousd with Avadim Meshuchrarim.
3. Nesinim are - the offspring of the Giv'onim, who tricked Yehoshua, and
whom he subsequently accepted for conversion.
(c) The Tana of our Mishnah permits a Ger to marry a Mamzer - because he
holds 'Kahal Geirim Lo Ikri Kahal'.
(d) According to the Tana Kama ...
1. ... a Shesuki is - someone who recognizes his mother but not his father.
2. ... an Asufi is - a waif (who was found abondoned in the street).
(a) The Tana chose to say 'Alu mi'Bavel' rather than 'Halchu le'Eretz
Yisrael' - to teach us by the way that Eretz Yisrael is higher than Bavel.
(b) We learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... "ve'Kamta ve'Alisa el ha'Makom Asher Yivchar Hashem" (which is
speaking in Eretz Yisrael) - that the Beis Hamikdash is the highest spot in
(c) We learn from the previous words (in the Pasuk in Shoftim) "Divrei Rivos
bi'She'arecha, (ve'Kamta ve'Alisa) ... " - that the Pasuk is referring to
the Beis Hamikdash (the place where the Sanhedrin sat to judge) and not only
2. ... "Lo Ye'amar Od Chai Hashem ... Asher He'elah va'Asher Heivi es Zera
Beis Yisrael me'Eretz Tzafonah u'mi Kol ha'Aratzos ... ' - that Eretz
Yisrael is higher than all other lands.
1. By taking all the Pesulim with him to Eretz Yisrael - Ezra ensured that
nobody would intermarry with them, because as long as he was alive, he kept
control over them, and later the Sanhedrin (who sat in Lishkas ha'Gazis),
would examine the Kohanim and the Levi'im before they began serving, to
verify their Yichus.
2. Had they remained in Bavel - a terrible mix-up would have ensued, because
there was noone of standing left in Bavel to keep strict control over the
Yichus of those who remained.
(a) Abaye reads our Mishnah 'Alu mi'Bavel', as it appears in our text. The
amended version of our Mishnah, according to Rava is - 'He'elum mi'Bavel'.
(b) They might be arguing over Rebbi Elazar's statement (Lo Alah Ezra ... ',
with which Rava agrees, and Abaye does not). On the other hand, both
Amora'im might agree with Rebbi Elazar, and when Abaye says 'Alu mi'Bavel',
he means that after Ezra separated them, they went to Eretz Yisrael of their
(c) When Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel says ...
1. ... 'Kol Aratzos Iysah le'Eretz Yisrael', he means - that compared to
Eretz Yisrael (whose Yichus was controlled by the Kohanim on the Sanhedrin),
the Yichus of other countries was like a dough (comprising a mixture of
flour, water, salt and bran).
(d) Even if the correct version in our Mishnah is 'He'elum' (like Rava), the
second statement is correct, because even though all those who accompanied
Ezra to Eretz Yisrael would have known who they were and would have kept
their distance, that would only pertain to that generation, but those of the
next generation would have forgotten which families Ezra had invalidated.
2. ... ve'Eretz Yisrael Iysah le'Bavel', he means - that compared to Bavel
(whose Yichus had been sorted out by Ezra as we explained), Eretz Yisrael
was like a dough.
(a) When, on the way to Eretz Yisrael, they arrived at the river that flowed
to Ahavah - Ezra discovered that there were no Levi'im who were fit to do
the Avodah (i.e. to play the instruments in the Beis Hamikdash).
(b) What marked the Levi'im that he did discover there - was the fact that
they were the ones who had cut off their thumbs in Bavel, to avoid "singing
the songs of Hashem in a foreign land").
(c) Even according to Rava, who maintains that Ezra had sorted out the
people before leaving, it is not surprising that he did not know about this
beforehand - because he only took note of those whose Yichus was Pasul but
not those who were Kasher.
(a) We learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Vayeishvu ha'Kohanim ve'ha'Levi'im u'Min ha'Am ... be'Areihem" -
that Kohanim, Levi'im and Yisre'elim accompanied Ezra from Bavel to
(b) Hatirshasa (alias Nechemyah ben Chachalyah) permitted them to continue
eating - Kodshei ha'G'evul (i.e. Terumah), as they had done in Bavel
2. ... "u'mi'B'nei ha'Kohanim B'nei Chavayah ... Eileh Bikshu Chesavam
ha'Misyachsim ve'Lo Nimtza'u, va'Yigo'alu min ha'Kehunah" - that Chalalim
went with him too.
(c) We query this from those who hold that once a Kohen eats Terumah, his
Yichus is automatically assumed to be impeccable ('Ma'alin mi'Terumah
le'Yuchsin') to which we reply - that this is not a problem here, because,
since they had lost their Chazakah re. Kodshei Mizbe'ach, nobody would make
any such assumptions.
(a) Despite the fact that there is no reason to issue any decrees against
the Kohanim, the significance of the statement 'Gedolah Chazakah' is - that
whereas before, they were only eating Terumah de'Rabbanan now they were
permitted to eat Terumah d'Oraysa.
(b) Alternatively, we add, they were in fact, restricted to Terumah
de'Rabbanan, but were forbidden to eat Terumah d'Oraysa.
1. ... Terumah d'Oraysa is - Terumas Chutz la'Aretz.
(c) According to this opinion, the significance of 'Gedolah Chazakah' is -
the fact that, even though there was now good reason to forbid them to eat
even Terumah de'Rabbanan (on account of Terumah d'Oraysa), Chazal did not do
so, due to 'Gedolah Chazakah'.
2. ... Terumah de'Rabbanan - Terumah of corn, wine and oil of Eretz Yisrael.
(d) We reconcile this with the Pasuk where Hatirshasa forbade those Kohanim
to eat Kodesh ha'Kodashim, implying that they were permitted to eat
everything else (including Terumah d'Oraysa) - by establishing "Kodesh
ha'Kodashim" to mean Terumah and Chazeh ve'Shok of Shelamim (as we shall now
(a) When the Torah writes ...
1. ... "ve'Chol Zar Lo Yochal *Kodesh*" - it is referring to Terumah
(because that is what the Torah is talking about).
(b) We learn from this latter Pasuk - that, even though a bas Kohen (who
married a Yisrael and whose husband died or divorced her leaving her without
children), returns to her father's house to eat Terumah, she may not eat
2. ... "u'Bas Kohen Ki Sih'yeh le'Ish Zar, Hi bi'Serumas *ha'Kodashim* Lo
Sochel" - it is referring to what is 'Moram min ha'Kodashim' (separated from
Kodshim), which is the Chazeh and the Shok (the chest and the right calf) of