REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Gitin 42
GITIN 42 - sponsored by Hagaon Rav Yosef Pearlman of London, England, a
living demonstration of love for and adoration of the Torah.
(a) Rabah establishes the Machlokes Tana'im (Rebbi and the Rabbanan, whether
it is possible to set half an Eved free), in a case where the owner retains
the other half of the Eved (but if he sells it, even the Rabbanan will agree
that the Shichrur is valid).
Will it make any difference whether the sale
takes place before the Shichrur or vice-versa?
(b) What does the Tana of one Beraisa say about someone who writes all his
property to his two Avadim?
(c) How does Rav Yosef presume to reconcile this Beraisa with another
Beraisa which, in a similar case, rules that the two Avadim do not even
(d) Why will this pose a Kashya on Rabah?
(a) We refute Rav Yosef's Kashya, by establishing both Beraisos according to
Then on what grounds does the Tana of the second Beraisa rule
that they do not acquire themselves?
(b) Could he even be speaking in a case where he gave the two Sh'taros to
the two Avadim simultaneously?
(c) How will Rabah then explain ...
- ... the other Beraisa (where he wrote 'Kulo' in each Sh'tar)?
- ... the Seifa of the latter Beraisa, which presents the case of 'Chatzi Chatzi', implying that the Reisha speaks when he wrote 'Kulo Kulo'?
(a) Why might it even be logical to interpret the Seifa as an extension of
the Reisha, rather than as a separate entity (in which case the Beraisa
would rebound on Rav Yosef, posing a Kashya on him)?
(b) How will Rav Yosef answer this Kashya? Why would there be no problem for
the Tana to present the case of 'Chatzi Chatzi after having taught us 'Kulo
(c) An alternative answer to Rav Yosef's initial Kashya on Rabah is that the
second Beraisa speaks when the master wrote the two gifts on one Sh'tar.
How do we learn from Get Ishah that such a gift is not valid?
(d) How do we now explain the Seifa 've'Im Amar Chatzi Chatzi, Lo Kanah'?
(a) On what grounds do we reject a third suggestion, establishing the second
Beraisa when he did not hand them the Sh'taros simultaneously, but one after
the other (even though both Beraisos speak when he wrote 'Kulo')?
(b) Rav Ashi deduces the reason that the Sh'tar is invalid from the Lashon
written in the Sh'tar: 'ha'Omer, Kol Nechasai Nesunin li'P'loni u'Ploni
How does he explain it?
(c) What then, did the master mean when he wrote the Sh'tar?
(a) In the Mishnah in Pe'ah, Rebbi Shimon, commenting on the Tana Kama's
statement 'ha'Kosev Kol Nechasav le'Avdo, Yeitzei le'Cheirus. Shiyer Karka
Kol she'Hu, Lo Yeitzei le'Cheirus', writes 'Le'olam Hu ben Chorin ad
she'Yomar Kol Nechasai Nesunin li'P'loni Avdi Chutz me'Echad me'Ribu
If the master left over some land, why does the Eved go free,
as long as he did not say 'Chutz me'Echad me'Ribu she'Bahen'?
(b) What does Rafram learn from there that repudiates Rav Ashi's
interpretation of the second Beraisa currently under discussion?
(a) If, according to Beis Hillel in our Mishnah (who initally holds that an
Eved who is half free serves his master one day, and himself the next), an
ox gores this Eved, who receives the damages?
Answers to questions
(b) Why, by the same token, does the Eved not 'marry' a Shifchah on the day
that he serves his master, and a bas Yisrael on the day that he serves
(c) What does the Tana of a Beraisa say about the case of a goring ox that
gored an Eved and killed him.
Who receives the K'nas?
(a) How much is the owner of a goring ox obligated to pay if it kills ...
(b) Why is the Din here different than in the previous case (where the ox
only *damaged* the Chatzi-Eved, Chatzi ben Chorin and), where the payment
depended on the day that the accident occurred?
- ... an Eved?
- ... a free man?
(a) What would be the case of damages where the Keren has not been
(b) According to Abaye, the Mazik then pays both Sheves Gedolah and Sheves
What is ...
(c) According to Rava, he pays only Sheves Ketanah.
- ... Sheves Gedolah?
- ... Sheves Ketanah?
What problem does this
pose on the case that we learned earlier 'Nagcho Shor, Yom shel Rabo,
le'Rabo ... '?
(a) Rava therefore amends the case from 'Nagcho Shor', to where it was a
person who damaged him.
What alternative answer do we give even without
amending the case?
(b) We ask whether, if an ox gores a freed Eved who still requires a Get
Shichrur, the Mazik is obligated to pay thirty Shekalim K'nas or not.
are the two sides of the She'eilah, based on the Pasuk in Mishpatim "Kesef
Sheloshim Shekalim Yiten *la'Adonav*"?
(c) How do we try to resolve the She'eilah from the Beraisa quoted above,
obligating the owner of a goring ox that killed an Eved to pay half the
K'nas to the master?
(d) How do we refute this proof?
(a) What does the Beraisa say about someone who knocked out his Eved's tooth
and then blinded him?
(b) What do we try and prove from here, that will resolve the She'eilah?
(c) We refute this proof by establishing the Beraisa like Rebbi Meir and
What do Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Tarfon say?
(d) Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi Eliezer hold that Shen ve'Ayin does require a Get
What compromise does Rebbi Akiva make quoting ha'Machri'in
(a) What are the twenty-four limbs that, if severed by the master, send an
Eved out to Cheirus?
(b) Why are these limbs not subject to Tum'as Tzara'as?
(c) We ask whether a freed Eved who still requires a Get Shichrur is
permitted to eat Terumah.
What are the two sides of the She'eilah, based
on the Pasuk in Emor, which refers to an Eved as "Kinyan Kaspo"?
(a) What does the Mishnah in Yevamos say about a Kohenes whose child became
mixed-up with the child of her Eved, concerning ...
We ask whether, if a master sold his Eved solely for the K'nas (should he be
gored to death by a goring ox), the sale is valid.
(b) How do we ...
- ... eating Terumah?
- ... receiving a portion of Terumah at the granary?
- ... their status (regarding freedom)?
- ... try to prove our current She'eilah from here?
- ... refute this proof?
Why will the She'eilah
apply even according to ...
Answers to questions
- ... Rebbi Meir, who holds that it is possible to be Makneh something that is not yet in the world?
- ... the Rabbanan, who hold that it is *not*?