Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) IS MARRIAGE REVERSIBLE?

(a) Question: If she returns to her father's house (after being handed to the husband), does she revert to the status of engaged?
(b) (Rava): Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael teaches that she does not.

1. (Beraisa - Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): "The vow of a widow or divorcee will stand" - this is obvious, she is not in the domain of her father, nor her husband!
2. Rather, it must be, she was handed to the messengers of the husband, and was widowed or divorced on the way.
3. Question: Do we consider her to be in her father's house, or in her husband's?
4. Answer: The verse ("Her vow will stand") teaches that she does not return to the father's house.

(c) (Rav Papa): We learn from a Mishnah that handing over to the husband's messengers suffices.

1. (Mishnah): One is stoned only for an engaged virgin Na'arah in her father's house.

i. 'In her father's house' must come to exclude having been handed to the messengers of the husband.

(d) (Rav Nachman Bar Yitzchak): We learn from a Mishnah that handing over to the husband's messengers suffices.

1. A married woman - once she entered the husband's domain for marriage, even though they didn't have relations, one who has relations with her is strangled.
2. 'Entered the husband's domain' - by itself (i.e. without Chupah).

(a) (Mishnah): R. Elazar Ben Azaryah expounded in Yavneh, a man is not obligated to feed his daughter;
(b) 'The sons inherit and the daughters are fed - just as the sons inherit only after the father dies, the daughters are fed only after his death.
(c) (Gemara): We infer, he is not obligated to feed his *daughter*, but must feed his son; also, there is no *obligation* to feed her, but there is a Mitzvah to feed her!
(d) Question: Our Mishnah is not like any of the Tana'im in the coming Beraisa!

1. (Beraisa): R. Meir says, it is a Mitzvah to feed one's daughters - all the more so, one's sons, since they engage in Torah;
2. R. Yehudah says, it is a Mitzvah to feed one's sons - all the more so, one's daughters, to prevent their disgrace;
3. R. Yochanan Ben Brokah says, it is an obligation to feed the daughters after the father dies; during his lifetime, neither sons nor daughters are fed.

i. The Mishnah is not as R. Meir or R. Yehudah - they say it is a Mitzvah (not an obligation) to feed sons!
ii. The Mishnah is not as R. Yochanan Ben Brokah - he says there is no Mitzvah to feed either!

(e) Answer #1: The Mishnah can be as R. Meir.

1. A man is not obligated to feed his daughter - the same is true of his son; there is a Mitzvah to feed his daughter, all the more so his son.

i. The Mishnah spoke of the daughter, to teach that even by a daughter, there is no obligation, but there is a Mitzvah.

(f) Answer #2: The Mishnah can be as R. Yehudah.

1. A man is not obligated to feed his daughter - all the more so, his son; there is a Mitzvah to feed his son, all the more so his daughter.

i. The Mishnah spoke of the daughter, to teach that even by a daughter, there is no obligation.

(g) Answer #3: The Mishnah can be as R. Yochanan Ben Brokah.

1. A man is not obligated to feed his daughter - the same is true of his son; there is not even a Mitzvah to feed them.

i. Since the end of the Mishnah says there is an obligation to feed a daughter after the father dies, the beginning said that there is no obligation during his lifetime.

(h) (R. Ilai): In Usha, it was enacted that a man feed his children while they are minors.
(i) Question: Is this the law?
(j) Answer: No.

1. When such a case came to Rav Yehudah, he would say, 'a serpent had a child, and is throwing (responsibility for feeding it) on the city'.
2. When such a case came to Rav Chisda, he would make him publicly declare, 'A raven wants children, but this man does not'.

i. Objection: A raven is cruel to its children - "To children of a raven that cry for food"!
ii. Answer: That applies to white ones; black ravens are fed by their parents.

3. When such a case came to Rava, he would ask, 'Do you want that they should be fed from Tzedakah?'

(k) This is if the father was not rich; if he was, we force him to feed them.

1. Rava forced Rav Nasan Bar Ami to give 400 Zuz to Tzedakah.

(a) (R. Ilai): In Usha, they enacted that one who gives all his property to his children, he and his wife are fed from it.
(b) Objection (R. Zeira): We learned a bigger Chidush - a widow is fed from his property - do we need to hear that he and his wife are fed?!

1. (Ravin): One who died and left a widow and a daughter - the widow is fed from his property, even if the daughter got married;
2. (Rav Yehudah): There was a case, the daughter died - they ruled, the widow is fed from his property.

(c) Answer: We must hear that he and his wife are fed - one might think, a widow is fed because there is no one to fend for her - but the husband can fend for himself and his wife!
(d) Question: Is the law as R. Ilai?
(e) Answer: We can learn from the following episode.
(f) A man came and kissed R. Yochanan's feet, because he had written his property to his sons, and R. Yochanan coerced the sons to feed him.