REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Gitin 47
GITIN 47 (2 Nisan) - Dedicated l'Iluy Nishmas: R' Zev ben R' Aharon (Milner)
zt'l, the Rav of Serenik (Byelorussia) by his great-granddaughter, Chani
(Pogrow) Shaw and family.
(a) In the case of the man who sold himself to Luda'i, who were the
(b) On what grounds did Rebbi Ami want to redeem even him, and certainly his
(c) On what grounds did the Rabbanan not allow him to do so?
(d) How did they know that he was not merely a Mumar le'Tei'avon? What is a
(a) What did Resh Lakish take with him when he sold himself to the Luda'i
(see Tosfos DH 'Resh Lakish)?
(b) On what basis did he get them to agree that he tie them up and hit them
with his sack?
(c) What did he say to each of the dead men as they leered at him? Why were
they all leering at him?
(d) What did he declare when ...
- ... his daughter asked him whether he did not need something to lie on whilst he slept?
- ... on his death-bed, he found that he was left with one Kav of saffron?
(a) What did Chazal obligate someone who sold a field to a Nochri in Eretz
Yisrael to do?
(b) What is the reason for this Takanah?
(c) What does Rabah learn from the Pasuk ...
(d) Rebbi Elazar disagrees. He learns from the Pasuk in Re'ei "Ma'asar
*Degancha*" "Degancha" 've'Lo D'gan Oved Kochavim'.
- ... in Behar "Ki Li ha'Aretz"?
- ... "Tehilim "ha'Shamayim Shamayim la'Hashem, ve'ha'Aretz Nasan li'Venei Adam"?
What does he learn
from the Pasuk in Tehilin "la'Hashem ha'Aretz u'Melo'ah"?
(a) What does Rabah, who obligates the grain of a Nochri to be Ma'asered,
learn from "Degancha"? What does 'Digun' mean?
(b) The Mishnah in Pe'ah states 'ha'Leket ve'ha'Shikchah ve'ha'Pe'ah shel
Oved-Kochavim Chayavin be'Ma'aser Ela-im-Kein Hifkir'.
Why does Rabah not
want to establish the Mishnah by the Leket ... of a Yisrael that a Nochri
collected? What does Rabah then prove from there?
(c) Then what is the Mishnah referring to, according to him?
(d) How do we refute Rabah's proof (by accepting the explanation in the
Mishnah that Rabah rejected)?
(a) What does the Beraisa say about someone who purchased a field from a
Nochri before the crops had grown to one third of their growth, and sold it
back to him afterwards?
Answers to questions
(b) What can we infer from here that poses a Kashya on Rabah?
(c) We reconcile Rabah with this Beraisa by establishing that it speaks in
What does this mean? How do this answer the Kashya?
(d) Is there anybody who might hold that even in Syria, the field of a
Nochri will be Chayav under the above circumstances?
(a) Rebbi says in a Beraisa that if a Yisrael and a Nochri purchased a field
together, Tevel and Chulin are mixed together.
What does he mean by that?
(b) The only way of Ma'asering these crops is 'Minei u'Bei'.
(c) What is the reason for this?
(a) What does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say?
(b) What is the basis of their Machlokes?
(c) How do we reconcile Rabah with this Beraisa, which clearly holds that
land belonging to a Nochri is not subject to Ma'asros?
(a) The Beraisa rules that someone who sells a field to a Nochri is
obligated to purchase each year the Bikurim and to bring them to
Yerushalayim because of Tikun ha'Olam.
What does Rav Chiya bar Avin
extrapolate from there that poses a Kashya on Rabah?
(b) Why, according to Rabah, should he be obligated to purchase the Bikurim
from the Nochri, even though Rabah himself agrees that he would not be
obligated to purchase the Ma'asros from him?
(c) Rav Ashi replies that there were two Takanos.
How does this answer the
Kashya on Rabah?
(d) The second Takanah is the one in our Mishnah.
What is the first one?
Why did Chazal waive the Torah obligation?
(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan, someone who sells his field only for the
Peiros brings Bikurim and reads the Parshah.
What is the case?
(b) Why must this refer to the time when the Yovel no longer applied?
(c) What is the criterion for the Yovel to apply? When did it cease to
(d) According to Resh Lakish, the buyer brings Bikurim but does not read the
Parshah. Why not? What is the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi
Yochanan and Resh Lakish (based on the Pasuk "me'Reishis Kol P'ri ha'Adamah
Asher Nasata Li Hashem")?
(a) How will Resh Lakish explain the Beraisa "u'le'Veisecha", 'Melamed
she'Adam Meivi Bikurei Ishto ve'Korei", despite the fact that a husband only
has a Kinyan Peiros in his wife's property (see Tosfos DH 'u'le'Veisecha')?
(b) In the second Lashon, it is Resh Lakish who asks on Rebbi Yochanan from
this Beraisa, which implies that specifically a husband reads when he brings
the fruit from his wife's property, but not anybody else who has only a
What is Rebbi Yochanan's reply?
(a) The Beraisa says that a man who is bringing his wife's Bikurim to the
Beis Hamikdash when he hears that she died, he brings them and reads the
Answers to questions
What do we infer from here that poses a Kashya on Rebbi Yochanan?
(b) Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina says that if someone appointed a Sheli'ach
to take his Bikurim to the Beis Hamikdash, and the Sheli'ach died on the
way, the owner brings the Bikurim but does not read the Parshah.
(c) How do we know that Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina is speaking about the
owner himself and not about another Shelia'ch finishing the job?
(d) How does this answer the Kashya we asked on Rebbi Yochanan?