REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kidushin 26
KIDUSHIN 24-30 (9-15 Sivan) - This week's study material has been dedicated
by Mrs. Rita Grunberger of Queens, N.Y., in loving memory of her husband,
Reb Yitzchok Yakov ben Eliyahu Grunberger. Irving Grunberger helped many
people quietly in an unassuming manner and is dearly missed by all who knew
him. His Yahrzeit is 10 Sivan.
(a) Karka is acquired by means of Kesef, Sh'tar and Chazakah.
(b) Why does the Tana of our Mishnah refer to Karka as 'Nechasim she'Yesh
(c) Which direct Kinyan does the Tana of our Mishnah specify for Metaltelin
('Nechasim she'Ein Lahem Acharayos')?
(d) In which regard ...
- ... do Metaltelin require Karka?
- ... does Karka require Metaltelin?
(a) Chizkiyah learns Kinyan Kesef by Karka from the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "Sados
Seeing as the Pasuk continues "ve'Chasov ba'Sefer
ve'Chasom", how do we know that Chazakah acquires even without a Sh'tar?
(b) Then what is the object of the Sh'tar?
(c) Rav qualifies the Din of Chazakah.
Under which circumstances does
Chazakah not acquire on its own?
(d) Rav Idi bar Avin, it seems, lived in a place where it was customary to
write a Sh'tar. What would he stipulate when purchasing land? What are the
implications of his stipulation?
(a) Why can we not learn Kinyan Sh'tar by Karka from the Pasuk "ve'Chasov
(b) Then from which Pasuk in Yirmiyah do we learn it?
(c) How does Shmuel qualify this ruling? By which sort of transaction does
Sh'tar alone ...
- ... acquire?
- ... not acquire?
(a) Rav Hamnuna asks on Shmuel from a Beraisa, which writes 'Kasav Lo al
ha'N'yar ... 'Sadi Mechurah Lach, Sadi Nesunah Lach, Harei Zu Mechurah
How did Rav Hamnuna himself answer this question?
(b) Rav Ashi establishes the Beraisa even by an ordinary field.
he then explain the Beraisa in a way that does not clash with Shmuel?
(c) Why did he then add the word 'Mechurah' in the Sh'tar?
(d) The Machlokes between Rav Hamnuna and Rav Ashi is based on the
interpretation of one word in the Beraisa.
(a) What does Chizkiyah learn from the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "u'Shevu
be'Areichem Asher Tefastem Bah"?
(b) According to Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, the source is a Pasuk in Eikev.
(c) The Tana of our Mishnah might learn that Meshichah acquires Metaltelin,
from the Pasuk in Behar "O Kanoh mi'Yad Amisecha" ('Davar ha'Nikneh mi'Yad
What does Rebbi Yochanan learn from there?
(d) In that case, what is the source for Meshichah?
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Divrei Hatamim "Vayiten Lahem
AvihemMatanos ... Im Arei Metzuros bi'Yehudah"?
Answers to questions
(b) Rebbi Akiva says in a Beraisa that the small measure of land is Chayav
Pe'ah and Bikurim.
Why does he not include 'Viduy' (of Biy'ur Ma'asros) in
(c) Besides P'ruzbul, what else does he include in his list?
(d) What do we try and prove from this last case?
(a) Rav Yosef was not happy with Rav Shmuel bar Bisna's explanation.
not? How did Rav Shmuel bar Bisna establish the case of 'Metaltelin Agav
Karka' in the above Beraisa?
(b) How did Rav Ashi explain Rav Shmuel bar Bisna, making it more
(c) What did the Chachamim advise that Madoni who visited Yeushalyim and who
wanted to give a gift of a large consignment of Metaltelin to do?
(a) So he went and bought a Beis Sela near Yerushalayim.
What might a
'Beis Sela' mean?
(b) What Metaltelin did he give the beneficiary together with the Beis-Sela?
(c) How do we try and prove from there that Kinyan Agav does not require the
Metaltelin to be Tziburin on the land?
(d) How do we reinterpret 'Beis Sela' in order to refute this proof?
(a) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav cited a similar incident, where the benefactor
purchased a Beis Rova of land near Yerushalayim.
What do we mean when we
say that according to some opinions, the man was very ill *like Rebbi
(b) Like in the previous case, the man gave someone a hundred sheep and a
hundred barrels of wine together with the plot of land.
How much land did
he give the beneficiary together with the Metaltelin?
(c) Did the Chachamim condone his actions?
(d) What do we try and prove from this incident? Why is this proof better
than the previous one?
(a) We reject this proof by establishing the gift, not as regular
Metaltelin, but as *money* to the value of the Metaltelin, which one could
pile up on a Tefach square piece of ground.
How do we attempt to prove
that this must be the case? How could the beneficiary otherwise have been
Makneh the gift to the benefactor?
(b) On what grounds do we refute this proof? How could he anyway have been
Makneh it, even if the gift comprised money?
(a) So how do we establish the case in a way that covers both money and
(b) Then why was he not Makneh it to the beneficiary via a third party with
(c) In that case, why did the Chachamim tell the benefactor that he had no
option other than Kinyan 'Agav', seeing as he could have used Meshichah via
a third person?
(a) What problem faced Raban Gamliel, who was traveling on a boat?
(b) It seems that he had already separated Terumah Gedolah, and he decided
to give his Ma'aser Rishon to Rebbi Yehoshua.
How do we know that Rebbi
Yehoshua was a Levi? Was he a singer or a gatekeeper?
(c) To whom did he decide to give his Ma'aser Ani?
(d) Why was he taking Ma'aser Ani and not Ma'aser Sheini?
(a) Bearing in mind that the produce was not in front of them, how was he
Makneh these two Ma'asros to the two men?
Answers to questions
(b) How did we try and resolve the She'eilah whether Kinyan Agav requires
Tziburin or not from his words? What did he say that prompted us to do that?
(c) How do we refute this proof too? What ulterior motive might he have had
in using the expression 'u'Mekomo Muskar Lo'?