Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) REVOKATION OF VOWS

(a) (Mishnah): A Kohen that marries a woman forbidden to Kohanim is disqualified from Temple service until he vows not to benefit from her.

1. (Beraisa): Immediately upon vowing, he may serve; after serving, he divorces her.
2. Question (against Rav Nachman): If one may permit a vow without detailing it - perhaps he will permit his vow and keep his wife!

(b) Answer #1: He must vow b'Rabim, i.e. in public.

1. This fits the opinion that a vow made in public cannot be revoked.
2. Question: According to the opinion that a vow made in public can be revoked, how may we answer?

(c) Answer #2: He must vow "Al Da'as Rabim," i.e. with a stipulation that the vow can only be rescinded with the consent of the public.

1. (Ameimar): The law is, even the opinion that a vow made in public can be revoked, a vow in which it is stipulated that the vow can only be rescinded with the consent of the public cannot be revoked.

i. This is only if there is no Mitzvah in revoking the vow; but for the sake of a Mitzvah, it may be revoked.
ii. There was a teacher of children who hit his students excessively. Rav Acha vowed Al Da'as Rabim that he should not teach any more. Ravina returned the teacher, since no other teacher taught as precisely as he did.

(a) (Mishnah): It was an enactment for the betterment of the world that witnesses sign a Get.
(b) Question: This is not an enactment, this is mid'Oraisa - "Written in a Sefer and signed"!
(c) Answer #1 (Rabah): The Mishnah is like R. Elazar, who says that a Get is empowered by the witnesses that saw it given.

1. Chachamim enacted that witnesses should sign it, for sometimes the witnesses die or go abroad and we cannot establish the legitimacy of the Get.

(d) Answer #2 (Rav Yosef): The Mishnah could even be like R. Meir - the enactment was that witnesses should explicitly sign their names.

1. (Beraisa): At first, witnesses (no matter what their names were) would sign 'I, Peloni, signed as a witness' - if their signatures were found on other documents, this document would be validated; if not, not;
2. R. Gamliel says, it was a great enactment that witnesses sign their names explicitly.

(e) Question: Does it not suffice to draw a sign?

1. Rav drew a fish as his signature; R. Chanina, a palm leaf; Rav Chisda would write a Samech; R. Oshiya, an Ayin; Rabah bar Rav Huna would draw a mast.

(f) Answer: Chachamim are difference, their signatures are well known.
(g) Question: When they first started signing thusly, they were not well known!
(h) Answer: They first started signing thusly when they wrote answers to questions or letters.

(a) (Mishnah): Hillel enacted Pruzbul...
(b) (Mishnah): A loan for which a Pruzbul was written is not cancelled is Shemitah - this is one of Hillel's enactments.

1. He saw that people were refraining from lending each other, transgressing "Beware, lest there be a base thought in your heart", so he enacted Pruzbul.
2. The essence of Pruzbul: the lender writes, 'I hand over to you, judges Peloni and Peloni of the city Peloni, that all debts owed to me by Peloni, I will collect them whenever I want.'

i. The judges or witnesses sign below.

(c) Question: Do we ever find, mid'Oraisa the loan is cancelled, and Hillel enacts that it should not be cancelled?!
(d) Answer #1 (Abaye): The Mishnah is like Rebbi, who says that cancellation of loans in Shemitah is only mid'Rabanan nowadays.

1. (Beraisa - Rebbi): "This is the matter of Shemitah - Shmot (withhold)".

i. The verse speaks of 2 withholdings - not working the land, and not collecting loans.
ii. When we may not work the land, we may not collect loans; at a time when the law of not working the land in Shemitah does not apply, neither does the law of canceling loans.

iii. Chachamim enacted cancellation of loans in Shemitah (nowadays) as a remembrance of Shemitah; Hillel saw that people were not lending, so he enacted Pruzbul.

(e) Question: Do we ever find, mid'Oraisa loan are not cancelled (in Shemitah nowadays), and Chachamim enact that it is cancelled?!
(f) Answer #1 (Abaye): Chachamim can make enactments in which they tell people to refrain from things (i.e. the lender should not collect his debt).
(g) Answer #2 (to questions (c)and (e) - Rava): Beis Din has power to make things Hefker.

1. (R. Yitzchak): "Whoever does not come in 3 days will lose all his property" - this teaches that Beis Din can declare property Hefker.
2. (R. Elazar): We learn from "These are the inheritances...Elazar the Kohen and Yehoshua and the heads of the fathers".

i. The leaders and the fathers are written together, to teach that just as fathers can bequeath whatever they want to their children, also the leaders can bequeath whatever they want to the nation.

(h) Question: Did Hillel enact Pruzbul for his generation, or for all generations?

1. Question: What difference does this make?
2. Answer: Whether later Chachamim can abolish it.

i. If he only enacted for his generation, any later Chachamim can abolish it.
ii. If he enacted for all generations - Chachamim can abolish the enactment of previous Chachamim only if they are greater than the previous Chachamim in Chachmah and number.

(i) Answer #1: Shmuel said, Pruzbul may only be written in the Beis Din of Sura or Nehardai.

1. If it was enacted for all generations, one should be able to write Pruzbul in any Beis Din!

(j) Rejection: Perhaps the enactment for generations was to write it in a Beis Din like that of Hillel, or of Rav Ami and Rav Asi, which has power to deprive people of their money;

1. It may not be written in a simple Beis Din.

(k) Answer #2: Shmuel said, Pruzbul is an Ulbana audacity of the judges - if I had the power, I would abolish it.

1. Beis Din cannot abolish an enactment of a different Beis Din unless the latter are greater in Chachmah and in number (and clearly, Shmuel was smaller in Chachmah than Hillel)!

(l) Rejection: Shmuel meant, if he was greater than Hillel, he would abolish it.
(m) (Rav Nachman): (If I had the power) I would perpetuate it.
(n) Question: Pruzbul already is perpetuated!
(o) Answer: He meant, I would established that it applies even for one who did not write a Pruzbul.
(p) Question: What did Shmuel mean by Ulbana - audacity or convenience?
(q) Answer: Ula said, a bride that has extramarital relations at the Chupah is Aluva (it is a language of audacity).

1. (Rav Mari, son of Shmuel's daughter): Ula learned this from "While the king was still at his banquet, my fragrance gave off its scent" (While still at Mount Sinai, Yisrael made the golden calf.)
2. (Rava): Yisrael retains its dearness to Hash-m - it says, "Gave its scent", not 'spoiled'.

(r) (Beraisa): "Those that love Hash-m are like the sun going out in its might" - this is one who is disgraced and does not disgrace; he hears (others recounting) his shame and does not answer, he serves Hash-m from love and is happy to receive afflictions.