REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kesuvos 83
***** Perek ha'Kosev le'Ishto *****
(a) Which three rights does a husband have in his wife's property?
(b) Which of them ...
(c) According to Rebbi Yehudah, what must he add in order to be forbidden to
eat even Peirei Peiros?
- ... comes into effect when he writes for his wife 'Din u'Devarim Ein Li bi'Nechasayich'?
- ... remains unaffected when he adds the word 'u've'Peirosayich'?
(d) And what must he write in order to be forbidden to eat Peiros and Peirei
Peiros even after his wife's death?
(a) On what basis does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel permit him to inherit the
field and to eat the Peiros even after his wife's death?
(b) What does he learn from the Pasuk in Pinchas "li'*She'eiro* ha'Karov
Eilav mi'Mishpachto *ve'Yarash Osah*"?
(c) Why is his T'nai valid regarding the Peiros during her lifetime and
invalid regarding the inheritance after her death?
(a) How does Rebbi Chiya amend the wording 'ha'Kosev le'Ishto ... '?
(b) The Beraisa states that if someone writes (or says) to the partner with
whom he shares a field 'Din u'Devarim Ein Li al Sadeh Zu, ve'Ein Li Eisek
Bah ve'Yadi Mesulekes Heimenah', he remains a partner as before.
(c) Then why does the Tana of our Mishnah accept the same Lashon with regard
to the Nechsei mi'Lug of one's wife?
(a) Rav Kahana says 'Nachalah ha'Ba'ah Lo le'Adam mi'Makom Acher, Adam
Masneh Alehah she'Lo Yirshenah'.
What does he mean when he says 'mi'Makom
Acher'? What does that have to do with a statement by Rava?
(b) When Rava himself mentioned 'Kegon Zu', he was referring to a statement
by Rav Huna Amar Rav.
What did Rav Huna Amar Rav say?
(c) Seeing as the ultimate reason behind this is because it is illogical to
force someone to accept a Takanah that is made for his benefit, why should
there be a difference whether a man withdraws from his wife's property
before his marriage to her or after it?
(a) According to Abaye, once a man marries, Chazal reinforced his rights,
making him an equal partner in his wife's Nechsei mi'Lug.
What does Rava
(b) The ramifications of their Machlokes are regarding a Shomeres Yavam, who
dies leaving property that she has inherited. According to Beis Shamai, her
father's heirs and her husband's (the Yavam) share it, whereas according to
Beis Hillel, it remains in the possession of her father's heirs. Abaye
establishes this Machlokes when she inherited the property whilst still
married to her husband.
What does Rava say?
(a) They asked whether a Kinyan would render the Lashon 'Din u'Devarim ... '
Answers to questions
Why can this She'eilah not pertain to the case in our Mishnah?
Then to which case does it pertain?
(b) Rav Yosef maintains that the Kinyan comes to reinforce the meaningless
withdrawal from the land, and is no more valid than the withdrawal itself.
What does Rav Nachman say?
(c) Abaye establishes Rav Yosef by 'Orer', but not by 'Omed'.
What does he
mean by that?
(d) When Ameimar rules that the Kinyan comes to acquire the land, is he
referring to the case of Omed (even according to Rav Yosef), or even to that
of Orer (according to Rav Nachman)?
(a) Why, in the Reisha of our Mishnah, do we restrict 'Din u'Devarim ... '
to where the woman sold the property? Why do we not say that he meant to
withdraw from all of his (three) rights?
(b) So how do we know that he did not mean to withdraw from ...
(c) How does Rav Ashi learn all this from the Lashon 'Din u'Devarim ...
- ... the Peiros, which is less than the losses caused by his wife's sale?
- ... the inheritance (in the event of his wife's death), because there is no reason to suspect that she might die?
(a) Rebbi Yehudah differentiates between Peiros and Peirei Peiros.
are Peirei Peiros?
(b) We are not sure whether the criterion, according to Rebbi Yehudah, who
mentions both 'Peirei Peiros' and 'ad Olam', is the former or the latter.
What is the third alternative?
(c) Assuming that the criterion according to him, is ...
(d) Why might it be necessary to mention both? Let him write only ...
- ... 'Peirei Peiros', why did he need to mention 'ad Olam'?
- ... 'ad Olam', why did he need to mention 'Peirei Peiros'?
- ... 'Peirei Peiros' (and not 'ad Olam')?
- ... 'ad Olam' (and not 'Peirei Peiros')?
(a) We ask what the Din will be if a man writes 'Din u'Devarim Ein Li
bi'Nechasayich u've'Peirei Peiros (without mentioning Peiros).
the two sides of the She'eilah?
(b) How do we attempt to resolve it logically?
(c) We counter this proof however, with Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah, who
specifically permits the husband to eat the Peirei Peiros (in the event that
he failed to insert them into his stipulation). There too, we can ask that,
once the woman has eaten the Peiros, where will the Peirei Peiros come from.
How do we answer both questions 'with one sweep' (leaving our She'eilah
(a) What statement did Rav issue with regard to the Machlokes between the
Tana Kama and Raban Shimon ben Gamliel?
Rav maintains that, if someone sells his friend an object on condition that
the prohibition of overcharging should not apply to him, it nevertheless
(b) We suggest that what he meant was that, whereas Raban Shimon ben Gamliel
holds that, should the woman die, her husband inherits her (in spite of his
stipulation) because of 'Masneh al Mah she'Kasuv ba'Torah', Rav holds that
he inherits her for a different reason.
(c) What will Rav then hold with regard to 'Masneh al Mah she'Kasuv
(d) On what grounds do we refute this suggestion?
What does Shmuel say?
Answers to questions