ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kidushin 72
KIDUSHIN 72-75 - 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.
(a) According to Rav Papa, just as the Amora'im argue about the borders with
re. to Yuchsin, so too, do they argue with re. to Gitin - meaning that a
Sheli'ach who brought a Get from one Medinah to another in Bavel (where they
were experts in writing Gitin Lishmah like they were in Eretz Yisrael), did
not need to declare 'be'Fanai Nichtav u'be'Fanai Nechtam' like in other
countries, where they were not experts in writing Gitin Lishmah).
(b) Rav Yosef says that as far as Gitin is concerned, they all agree that
the border extends as far as 'Arba Tinyana de'Gishra'.
1. 'Arba' - a marsh in which reeds grow.
(c) When Rami bar Aba said ...
2. 'Arba Tinyana' - is the second marsh which was lower down to the north of
the first one.
1. ... 'Chavil Yama Techelta de'Bavel' - he meant that the place Chavil Yama
on the River P'ras by Bursi was supreme territory Yuchsin-wise.
(d) Ravina adds Tzitzura to the latter pair - and his opinion has the
support of a Beraisa.
2. ... 'Shunya ve'Guvya Techelta de'Chavil Yama' - he meant that in Chavil
Yama itself, Shunya and Guvya were supreme.
(a) What caused Rav Papa to think that Chavil Yama was no longer reliable
re. Yuchsin - was the fact that a Kuti requested one of their daughters in
marriage. He thought that his request was granted, but in fact, it was
(b) The other reason (which we reject as unlikely) that might Rav Papa have
had for stating his opinion - is because he requested one of their daughters
in marriage and was turned down.
(a) When a man claimed that he was a resident of Shut Meishut, Rebbi
Yitzchak Nafcha arose and declared that Shut Meishut was situated between
the two rivers.
(b) Abaye explained this declaration with a statement of Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi
Chanina. When the latter declared that between the rivers is like Golah, he
was referring to Pumbedisa, whose Yichus was known to be exemplary.
(c) Abaye reconciles Rebbi Yochanan, who places Shut Meishut south of Ihi
de'Kiri, which is the most southernmost point mentioned to date, with his
own opinion (cited earlier), that the eastern border ends at the crossing of
Gizma (which is further north) - by referring to a strip of land which
jutted from Bavel southwards into the area that was not part of Bavel, and
which contained Shut Meishut.
(a) Rav Ika bar Avin Amar Rav Chananel Amar Rav - compared area of the River
Nihavand to 'Golah' re. Yuchsin.
(b) When Abaye (unaware that he had quoted Rav Chananel Amar Rav) announced
not to take any notice of him, since he only issued this ruling because a
Yevamah had fallen to him from that area - Rav Ika bar Avin replied that the
statement was not his own, but a quote from Rav Chananel (which Rav Chananel
(c) Rav Aba bar Kahana disagreed with the previous ruling. He named each of
the places specified by the Pasuk in Shmuel "va'Yanchem be'Chalach
u've'Chavor, Nahar Gozen ve'Arei Madai". "Chalach" is Chilazon', and "Arei
Madai", according to some, Nihavand ve'Chavrosehah. Rebbi Yochanan declared
all these areas - Pasul (contrary to the previous ruling of Rav Ika bar
(d) According to Shmuel, 've'Chavrosehah' refers to Mushchi, Chuski and
Rumki. 'Mushchi' cannot be synonymous with Mushchani - because Rebbi Chiya
bar Avin Amar Shmuel earlier compared Mushchani to 'Golah' re. Yuchsin.
(a) In Nevuchadnetzar's dream, the first of the four beasts (which
corresponded to Bavel and resembled a lion), had "three ribs in its mouth,
between its teeth", representing Chilazon, Hadayav and Netzivin. "in its
mouth" - implies that they were inside the lion, whereas "between its
teeth" - implies that they protruded outside, because these three cities
were constantly rebelling against Bavel; sometimes they were under Bavel's
jurisdiction, sometimes it was not.
(b) The second beast, which resembled a bear - corresponded to Persia.
(c) The Persians resembled bears in four ways, says the Beraisa quoted by
Rav Yosef: They ate like bears and were fat like a bears - they were hairy
like bears and they were restless like bears.
(d) When Rebbi Ami saw a Persian astride a horse - he would comment how much
he resembled a moving bear.
(a) When Rebbi asked Levi to describe various nationalities, he described
1. ... the Persians - as being strong like the soldiers of Beis David.
(b) On his deathbed, Rebbi prophesied about various cities in Bavel. About
2. ... the Chavrin (neighbors of the Persians, who were wilder than them) -
as resembling destructive angels.
3. ... Yishme'elim - as resembling demons that haunt the bathroom.
4. ... the Talmidei-Chachamim of Bavel - like administering angels.
1. ... Humnaya, he said - that the residents were all Amonim.
(c) In Birsa de'Satya, they strayed from the path. When ...
2. ... Misgarya - that they were all Mamzeirim.
3. ... Birka, he said - that two brothers had swapped wives.
1. ... the pool swarmed a lot of fish - they caught them on Shabbos.
(d) In Akra de'Agma, Rav Ada bar Ahavah sat in the bosom of Avraham Avinu.
Assuming this to mean that he died on that day - then he cannot have been
the Rav Ada bar Ahavah who appears in Shas (because he was still alive in
the days of Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, many generations after Rebbi died);
whereas if it means that he was circumcised - then it was indeed the same
2. ... Rav Acha b'Rebbi Yashiyah placed the culprits in Cherem - they Sh'mad
(a) On the day that ...
1. ... Rebbi Akiva died - Rebbi was born.
(b) We learn from here - that one Tzadik does not pass away from the world
before another Tzadik is born to take his place, as the Pasuk writes in
Koheles "ve'Zarach ha'Shemesh u'Va ha'Shemesh".
2. ... Rebbi died - Rav Yehudah was born.
3. ... Rav Yehudah died - Rava was born.
4. ... Rava died - Rav Ashi was born.
(c) Based on the Pasuk "ve'Ner Elokim Terem Yichbeh", we learn - that Shmuel
was born before Eli died.
(d) Rav Yehudah connects the Pasuk in Eichah "Tzivah Hashem le'Ya'akov
Sevivav Tzarav" to Humnaya and Pum Nahara - on the basis of Rebbi's
prophesy, that the residents of Humnaya were Amonim. Together with Mo'av,
they proved to be our bitterest enemies, causing us harm at every
(a) When Yechezkel cried out at the death of Paltiel ben Benayahu, Rav and
Shmuel argue over whether he cried out for the good or for the bad. What
was unusual about his death that caused the Navi to react in this way,
assuming that he cried out ...
1. ... for the good was - that he died very young.
(b) The one who interprets it ...
2. ... for the bad was - that he died a natural death.
1. ... for the good ascribes the Navi's anguish at his untimely death - to
the fact that, when Nevuchadnetar's son-in-law, governer of Meishan, asked
his father-in-law why he had not sent any of the captives from Yerushalayim
to serve *him*, the king wanted to send him Jewish captives. Paltihu ben
Benayahu, however, who was a distinguished man, then volunteered to serve
the King in person, if he would send slaves to Meishan to serve his
son-in-law, thereby relieving other Jews from having to go.
(c) Having already written (with re. to the previous incident) "P'neihem
Keidmah", Yechezkel saw fit to add "Achoreihem el Heichal Hashem" - to
indicate that, not satisfied with that, they actually bared themselves and
defacated as an additional indignity.
2. ... for the bad ascribes his crying out in dismay at his painless death -
to his having been one of the twenty-five men who standing in the Beis
Hamikdash, turned their backs towards the Kodesh Kodshim and bowed down
eastwards towards the rising sun.
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Avin Amar Shmuel compares Mushchani to 'Golah' re.
Yichus (as we learned earlier). Re. Meishan, he says, they were not worried
about Avadim nor Mamzeirus. What they *were* worried about was - the
Kohanim, who were not particular about marrying divorcees.
(b) We try and prove that Shmuel is the one who interpretated the Navi's cry
negatively - from his statement that 'they were not worried about Avadim'
(implying that there were no Avadim there, contrary to the one who
interprets it positively, as we explained above).
(c) We answer that Shmuel may well interpret it positively, but that he
follows his own reasoning elsewhere. He extrapolates from the Pasuk "Kol
Eved Ish Miknas Kesef" - that when an Eved is stolen from his maaster, and
the latter despairs from getting him back, he is free and does not require a
(d) That explains the fact that the Chachamim were not concerned about
Avadim in Meishan - because in this case too, the Avadim who were sent to
Meishan were stolen by Nevuchadnetzar and their masters had despaired from
getting them back. Consequently, they were no longer considered Avadim.
(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel maintains that the author of our Mishnah, which
differentiates between Bavel and other lands re. Yichus, is Rebbi Meir.
According to the Chachamim - all lands are be'Chezkas Kashrus (and there is
no reason to automatically suspect that any family is Pasul).
(b) Ameimar permitted Rav Huna bar Nasan to marry a woman from Mechuza,
which was situated outside the borders of Bavel, because he relied on Rav
Yehudah Amar Shmuel. Rav Ashi objected - because in the Batei Hamedrash of
Rav Kahana, Rav Papa and Rav Z'vid, they disagrees with Rav Yehudah Amar
(c) Ameimar nevertheless overrode Rav Ashi's objection - because that is
what he heard from Rav Z'vid from Neherda'a.
(a) Rebbi Yossi in a Beraisa declares that, when Mashi'ach comes, Mamzeirim
and Nesinim will be accepted. Rebbi Meir says - they won't.
(b) Rebbi Meir counters Rebbi Yossi's proof from the Pasuk in Yechezkel
"ve'Zarakti Aleichem Mayim Tehorim u'Tehartem" - by quoting the words follow
"mi'Kol Tum'oseichem u'mi'Kol Giluleichem", from which he extrapolates
've'Lo min ha'Mamzeirus'.
(c) And Rebbi Yossi quotes the words after that - "Ataher Eschem" 'to
(a) Bearing in mind that the Pasuk "Veyashav Mamzer be'Ashdod" refers to the
future, it poses a Kashya on Rebbi Yossi - inasmuch as it implies that, even
in the days of Mashi'ach, it will be necessary to sort out the Mamzeirim.
(b) Rebbi Yossi therefore interprets the Pasuk with reference to Yisrael -
who were previously expelled from Eretz Yisrael (of which Ashdod is part,
since Yehoshua distributed it to Yisrael together with the rest of Eretz
Yisrael, even though they did not succeed in capturing it), but who will
then be able to dwell there in safety when Mashi'ach arrives.
(c) Rav Yosef says that, had Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel not ruled like Rebbi
Yossi - in the days of Mashi'ach there would be so many Mamzeirim that they
would have to be separated in droves.
(a) Rebbi Yossi in a Beraisa permit a Ger to marry a Mamzeres - because he
holds that the community of Geirim is not called a community ('Kehal Geirim
Lo Ikro Kahal', in which case the Pasuk "Lo Yavo mamzer bi'Kehal Hashem"
does not pertain to them). The child will be - a Mamzer (because of the
principle 'Lo Halach Achar Pesulo').
(b) Rebbi Yehudah disagrees - because he holds 'Kehal Geirim Ikri Kahal).
(c) And the Tana permits a Ger, an Eved Meshuchrar and a Chalal to a
Kohenes - because of the principle 'Lo Huzharu Kesheiros Linasei
li'Pesulin', as we learned earlier.