ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kidushin 35
KIDUSHIN 32-35 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah, Mora and Piryah ve'Rivyah are
not considered 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'in ke'Echad', because both are needed.
We cannot learn ...
1. ... Piryah ve'Rivyah with a 'Mah Matzinu' from Mora - because we would
then learn from "ve'Chivshuhah" that a woman, who does not get involved in
capturing, is not obligated to perform the Mitzvah of Piryah ve'Rivyah
(b) According to those who hold 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'in ke'Echad Melamdin',
we have a problem ...
2. ... Mora with a 'Mah Matzinu' from Piryah ve'Rivyah - because we would
rather exempt her from Mora Av va'Eim even when she is unmarried, because
when she grows up and marries, she will certainly become exempt.
1. ... from Matzah and Hakheil (like we asked on the previous Amud) -
inasmuch as we ought to learn from there that women are obligated in all
Mitzvos Asei she'ha'Z'man Geramah?
(c) Rava cited the Papuna'i who knew the answer to these Kashyos.
2. ... from Talmud Torah and Pidyon ha'Ben (according to Rebbi Yochanan ben
Berokah, who cannot include Piryah ve'Rivyah in this list) - inasmuch as we
ought to learn from there that women are exempt from all Mitzvos Asei
she'Ein ha'Z'man Geramah?
referring to - Rav Acha bar Ya'akov.
(d) Rav Acha bar Ya'akov ...
1. ... learns from the Pasuk in Bo "ve'Hayah Lecha le'Os al Yadecha ...
Lema'an Tihyeh Toras Hashem be'Ficha" - that the entire Torah is compared to
Tefilin, all Mitzvos that are similar to Tefilin, (referring to Mitzvos Asei
2. ... extrapolates from there - that Mitzvos Asei she'Lo ha'Z'man Geramah,
women are Chayav.
(a) The problem with this according to those who hold that Tefilin is a
Mitzvas Asei she'Lo ha'Z'man Geramah is - that in that case, we ought to
exempt women even from 'Mitzvos Asei she'Lo ha'Z'man Geramah'.
(b) We answer that Rebbi Meir is the Tana who considers Tefilin to be a
Mitzvas Asei she'Lo ha'Z'man Geramah - and he holds 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'im
ke'Echad, *Ein* Melamdin' (whereas the current problem only arose according
to those who are of the opinion 'Melamdin').
(c) Rebbi Yehudah, who holds 'Sh'nei Kesuvim ha'Ba'in ke'Echad, Melamdin,
and who also considers Tefilin to be a Mitzvas Asei she'Lo ha'Z'man Geramah,
will exempt women from all Mitzvos Asei she'ha'Z'man Geramah - from Matzah,
Simchah and Hakheil, and, as we have already explained everybody agrees that
'Sheloshah Kesuvim ha'Ba'im ke'Echad, Ein Melamdin'.
(d) We are only able to include Hakheil in this list - because we do not
hold like Abaye, who maintains 'Ishah, Ba'alah Mesamchah'.
1. Rav Yehudah Amar Rav as well as Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael learns from
the Pasuk (in connection with the Korban Shevu'as ha'Pikadon by Gezel
ha'Ger) "Ish O Ishah Asher Ya'aseh mi'Kol Chat'os ha'Adam" - that a woman
has the same Din as a man re. all Malkos and other punishments in the Torah.
(b) We require three Pesukim because we cannot learn not one from the other.
We cannot learn ...
2. ... de'Bei Rebbi Eliezer from the Pasuk in Mishpatim ... "ve'Eileh
ha'Mishpatim Asher Tasim Lifneihem" - that she has the same Din as a man re.
Dinim (all money matters).
3. ... de'Bei Chizkiyah from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "ve'Im Shor Nagach Hu
... ve'Heimis Ish O Ishah" - that if others kill her, they are subject to
the death-penalty (or to Kofer in this case) as if they had killed a man.
1. ... the second case (regarding Dinim) from the first (regarding
Kaparah) - because the Torah did not wish to deprive a woman of the
opportunity to attain an atonement, whereas in matters of Dinim, seeing as
it is unusual to find women in the business world, the Torah might have
precluded her from the Dinim involved.
2. ... the first from the second - because we might have said that the Torah
incorporates women in this area because women, like men, need to earn a
livelihood, whereas Kaparah is perhaps confined to men, who are obligated in
all the Mitzvos, but not to women (who are exempt from Talmud-Torah).
3. ... the first two cases from the third (of death) - because there we
might have thought that the Torah took pity on her because it stands to
reason that one is more strict where human life is concerned.
(a) We learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Emor el ha'Kohanim B'nei Aharon" - that female Kohanim are not
included in the La'av pertaining to Kohanim of not rendering themselves
(b) Apart from the logical outcome of the fact that a woman has no beard to
destroy, we attribute the prohibition of 'Lo Sashchis' not applying to
women - to the change of Lashon from "Roshchem" (in the plural) to
"Zekanecha" (in the singular) from which we then extrapolate "Zekancha",
've'Lo Z'kan Isht'cha'.
2. ... "Lo Sakifu Pe'as Roshchem ve'Lo Sachchis es Pe'as Zekanecha" - that
whoever is included in the latter prohibition, is also included in the
former, but not someone who is not.
(a) We initially establish the Beraisa 'Z'kan Ishah ve'ha'Saris she'He'elu
Se'ar, Harei Hein ke'Zakan le'Chol Divreihem' - by the La'av of "Lo
Sashchis". The problem this presents is - that it clashes with what we just
learned, that a woman is Patur from "Lo Shashchis".
(b) Abaye refutes this interpretation of the Beraisa however, on the basis
of the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Pe'as" "Pe'as" (see Tosfos DH 'le'Hashchasah' as
to why Abaye retracts from the previous D'rashah) - where we preclude women
from the La'av by Yisre'elim (in Kedoshim) from Kohanim (in Emor), where the
Torah writes "Emor el ha'Kohanim B'nei Aharon" ('ve'Lo B'nos Aharon').
(c) We query the need for this 'Gezeirah-Shavah' on the basis of a 'Kal
va'Chomer' - if Kohanos are precluded, even though Kohanim have been given
more Mitzvos than Yisre'eilim, then Yisre'eiliyos should certainly be
(d) We refute the 'Kal va'Chomer' however, and establish the need for the
'Gezeirah-Shavah', based on the argument of 'Hifsik ha'Inyan' - meaning
that, if not for the need to Darshen the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' (which the Torah
must have inserted for a reason), we would have confined the D'rashah "B'nei
Aharon", 've'Lo B'nos Aharon', to the La'av of Tum'ah, where it is written,
and not to the other La'avin that are written later in the Parshah (such as
(a) We query this argument however, on the grounds - that we can still apply
the S'vara 'Hifsik ha'Inyan', and as for the 'Gezeirah-Shavah', we need it
for something else.
(b) Based on the Pasuk "Lo Sashchis" written by Yisre'eilim, and "Lo
Yegaleichu" written by Kohanim, we can Darshen from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' -
that one is only Chayav if one removes hair in a way that combines shaving
(c) One is not Chayav for cutting one's beard ...
1. ... with scissors - because it is not called 'Hashchasah' (it does not
destroy the hair down to the root).
(d) We finally discard the S'vara of 'Hifsik ha'Inyan' and still remain with
the previous D'rashah from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' - on account of the extra
word "Pe'as" (since the Torah could have written "ve'Lo Sashchis es
she'bi'Zekeinecha" [and the word "es" would still have been considered a
'Gezeirah-Shavah', as if the Torah had actually written "Pe'as"]). The Torah
inserted "Pe'as" to teach us that the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' (connected with
"B'nei Aharon" 've'Lo B'nos Aharon') extends to the rest of the Parshah too.
2. ... a plane - because it is not called Gilu'ach' (since that is not the
way people shave).
(a) So we try to establish the Beraisa 'Z'kan Ishah ve'ha'Saris she'He'elu
Se'ar, Harei Hein ke'Zakan le'Chol Divreihem' with regard to Tum'as
Nega'im - meaning that the Din of Tum'ah be'Makom Se'ar (e.g. two yellow
hairs instead of white ones) applies to the beard of a woman or a Saris
(should they grow one), just like it does to a man's.
(b) We initially reject this proposal on the grounds - that the Torah has
already incorporated women in the Din of Nig'ei Se'ar, when it begins the
Parshah with the words "Ish O Ishah".
(c) So we try to establish it with re. to Taharas Nega'im - meaning that in
the event that a woman (or a S'ris) did contract Tzara'as on her beard,
then, after completing the Tum'ah process, she will require shaving and
bringing birds, just like a man.
(d) We reject this suggestion too however, on the grounds that wherever
there is Tum'as Nega'im, it goes without saying that there is Taharas
Nega'im. We conclude 'Itz'trich, Salka Da'atach Amina li'Tzedadim' - meaning
that we re-establish the Beraisa by Tum'as Nega'im, and that we might
otherwise have thought that "Ishah" only pertains to Nig'ei Se'ar of the
head ("be'Rosh") which is written next to "Ishah", but not to that of the
beard ("O be'Zakan"), which is written after it.
(a) Isi ben Yehudah, quoting a Beraisa, extrapolates from the Pasuk ...
We conclude however, that according to Isi ben Yehudah, "Ki Am Kadosh"
cannot pertain to Seritah exclusively (and not Gedidah) - because he
considers Seritah and Gedidah to be one and the same (and there is no
difference between whether one makes the cut with an implement or with one's
1. ... "*Banim* Atem la'Hashem Elokeichem, Lo Sisgodedu ve'Lo Sasimu Korchah
Bein Eineichem la'Meis" - that women are not subject to 'Korchah' either
("Banim", 've'Lo Banos').
(b) The Tana prefers to include women in Gedidah and to preclude them from
Korchah (rather than vice-versa) - because the former applies both to a
location on the body where there is hair and to one where there is not,
whereas the latter is confined to one of hair.
2. ... "Ki *Am* Kadosh Atah la'Hashem Alokecha" - that they are however,
subject to 'Gedidah' (because women are included in 'Am').
(c) We ask why "Banim Atem" should not incorporate both Korchah and Gedidah,
and "Ki Am Kadosh" include women in the Din of "Seritah" ("ve'Seret
la'Nefesh Lo Sitnu ... " [Kedoshim]). The advantage in learning like this
(even though "Seritah" is not written in the same Parshah is - that it
avoids having to invert the order of the Pasuk in Re'ei, which pairs "Banim
Atem" with Korchah, and "Am Kadosh" with Gedidah, even though this is not
the way they are juxtaposed.
(d) If we did learn that way, the difference between Seritah and Gedidah
would be - one cutting with an implement, the other, using one's hands.