(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 55

KIDUSHIN 51-55 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.


(a) The Mishnah in Shekalim rules that if one finds an animal at a distance equivalent to Migdal Eider from Yerushalayim and does not know its status, one must treat it as if it was Kodshim.
Why is that?

(b) One considers a male animal an Olah.
What does one consider a female?

(c) We ask how one knows that a male is an Olah, seeing as it could also be a Shelamim.
How does Rebbi Oshaya resolve this problem? Why must the author of the Mishnah then be Rebbi Meir, and not Rebbi Yehudah?

(d) What would the procedure then be?

(a) According to the Mishnah in Me'ilah, there are only two things belonging to Hekdesh that do not go out to Chulin when they are used. One of them is an animal that is designated as a Korban.
Why is that?

(b) What is the second thing listed there?

(c) According to what we have just learned, if two people rode on an animal that is designated as a Korban, or drank from a Kos of Hekdesh (one after the other), who would then be Mo'el?

(d) How do we reconcile this Mishnah with Rebbi Meir, who, we just concluded, holds that Hekdesh does go out to Chulin be'Meizid?

(a) If, according to Rebbi Yehudah, 'Hekdesh be'Shogeg Mis'chalel' does not extend to Kedushas ha'Guf, why should it do so according to Rebbi Meir by Meizid?

(b) Rebbi Meir said his Din ('Hekdesh be'Meizid Mis'chalel') by Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis, which is Kodshei Kodshim.
How does Rebbi Oshaya know that he extends it to the Shelamim in the Mishnah in Shekalim, which are Kodshim Kalim?

(c) What did Rebbi Chama bar Ukva Amar Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina say about this?

Answers to questions



(a) What problem does Rebbi Yochanan have with Rebbi Oshaya's explanation (requiring the finder to transfer the Kedushah of the found animal on to money to bring as an Olah and a Shelamim)?

(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Bechukosai "ve'Im ba'Beheimah ha'Temei'ah, u'Fadah be'Erkecha"? What does "ha'Temei'ah" refer to in this context?

(c) How does he therefore amend Rebbi Oshaya's explanation to explain the Mishnah in Shekalim?

(a) We learned above that if he found a male animal, he redeems it on an Olah, as well as a Shelamim.
Why do we not contend with the possibility that it is a Todah, which will require an additional animal, as well as forty loaves?

(b) And how do we know that it is not ...

  1. ... an Asham Gezeilos, Me'ilos or Shifchah Charufah?
  2. ... an Asham Metzora or Nazir?
(c) Why do we not answer that he does indeed bring an Asham with a fourth set of money, like we answered by Todah?

(d) And why do we not contend with the possibility that it is a Pesach ...

  1. ... in its time?
  2. ... after its time?
  3. ... a Bechor or Ma'aser Beheimah?
(a) We also learned that if he finds a female animal, he redeems it on an Olah, as well as a Shelamim.
Why do we not contend with the possibility that it is ...
  1. ... a Chatas?
  2. ... a Chatas that has already entered its second year?
(b) Chananya bar Chachinai in a Beraisa states that if one did find a female animal in its first year, it is a Chatas.
What is the problem with this statement?

(c) So what did he really say?

(d) What does this mean in practical terms?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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