(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Kidushin 37

KIDUSHIN 36-40 - 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) We know that, when the Tana of our Mishnah speaks about 'Teluyah ba'Aretz' and 'Einah Teluyah ba'Aretz', he is not making a distinction between Mitzvos by which the Torah uses an expression of Bi'ah (such as "Ki Savo'u el ha'Aretz"), and by which it does not, because the Torah writes 'Bi'ah' by Tefilin and by Peter Chamor (the redemption of a first born donkey), yet they apply in Chutz la'Aretz.
How do we know this?

(b) Then how does Rav Yehudah explain the distinction?

(c) In the Pasuk in Re'ei "Eileh ha'Chukim ve'ha'Mishpatim, Asher Tishmerun La'asos, ba'Aretz ... Kol ha'Yamim Asher Atem Chayim al ha'Adamah", how does the Beraisa interpret ...

  1. ... "ha'Chukim"?
  2. ... "ve'ha'Mishpatim"?
  3. ... "Asher Tishmerun"?
  4. ... "La'asos"?
(a) How do we reconcile the apparent contradiction between "ba'Aretz" and "Kol ha'Yamim Asher Atem Chayim al ha'Adamah" (implying even Chutz la'Aretz)?

(b) And what do we learn from the Pasuk that follows "Abeid Te'abdun es Kol ha'Mekomos ... "?

(a) Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah, says 'Af ha'Chadash', which is open to two interpretations.
To what is he referring if he is coming to be ...
  1. ... strict?
  2. ... lenient?
(b) Assuming that Rebbi Eliezer comes to be ...
  1. ... strict, what will be the basis of the Machlokes?
  2. ... lenient, why is the Tana Kama strict by Chadash, considering that only Orlah and Kil'ayim was included in the Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai?
(c) Then why is Rebbi Eliezer lenient?
(a) We resolve the above She'eilah (whether Rebbi Eliezer comes to be stringent or lenient) through a statement by Abaye, naming the Ba'al P'lugta of Rebbi Eliezer as Rebbi Yishmael.
What did Rebbi Yishmael say about 'Kol Makom she'Ne'emar Bo Moshvos'? How does that resolve our She'eilah?

(b) Which Mitzvah does Rebbi Yishmael refer to? What does he learn from "Moshvos"?

(c) According to him, was there an obligation to bring Nesachim ...

  1. ... on a Bamas Yachid?
  2. ... on the Bamas Tzibur in Nov and Giv'on?
(a) How does Rebbi Akiva query Rebbi Yishmael from Shabbos?

(b) According to him therefore - "Moshvos" obviously means even in Chutz la'Aretz (like his Rebbe, Rebbi Eliezer).
What does it then come to include with regard to Nesachim?

(c) How does Rebbi Yishmael refute Rebbi Akiva's Kashya? What makes Shabbos different (to apply in Chutz la'Aretz, even though "Moshvos" that is written by it, does not come to incorporate Chutz la'Aretz)?

Answers to questions



(a) What is the problem with Rebbi Yishmael learning his Din from Nesachim?
In which way might Nesachim be different?

(b) We answer that Rebbi Yishmael is indeed only concerned with those Mitzvos where the Torah writes "Bi'ah" and "Moshvos". What is the problem with that from his answer to Rebbi Akiva, who queried him from Shabbos?

(c) How do we answer this Kashya too?

(d) Why does Rebbi Akiva not want to learn like Rebbi Yishmael (that "Bi'ah" and "Moshav" come to delay the Din of Niskei Yachid until after the inheritance and the distribution)?

(a) Abaye points out that Rebbi Yishmael clashes with Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael.
What does Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael say about 'Ho'il ve'Ne'emru Bi'os ba'Torah S'tam'?

(b) To which Halachah is Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael referring?

(c) In which regard does he clash with Rebbi Yishmael?

(d) Rebbi Yishmael disagrees with Tana de'Bei Rebi Yishmael because he considers it a case of 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad'.
Which other Halachah follows the same pattern as that of Melech?

(a) Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael does not consider them to be 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad' because both are necessary.
Had the Torah written only ...
  1. ... Melech, why would we not have known Bikurim from it?
  2. ... Bikurim, why would we not have known Melech from it?
(b) On what grounds does Rebbi Yishmael himself argue with this S'vara (See Tosfos DH 'Bikurim')?

(c) In fact, Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael concedes this point, but he argues that, even if the Torah had not written this Din by Bikurim, we would have learned from Chalah that Bikurim too, takes effect immediately.
What does this prove?

(d) On what grounds is it unanimously agreed that Chalah does in fact, take effect immediately?

(a) Now that we adopt the view that Mitzvos that are not connected with the ground apply even in Chutz la'Aretz, why does the Torah find it necessary to write "Moshvos" ...
  1. ... by Shabbos?
  2. ... by Cheilev and blood
  3. ... by Matzah and Maror?
(b) And why does the Torah write "Bi'ah" by Tefilin and by Pidyon ha'Ben?

(c) When did Yisrael eat the fresh corn of Eretz Yisrael for the first time?

(d) According to those who learn that "Moshvos" implies after the inheritance and the distribution, why did Yisrael not eat Chadash as soon as they entered the land?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,