ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Kesuvos 50
(a) According to Rebbi Ila'a, they decreed in Usha that a person should not
give more than one fifth of his profits for Tzedakah - so that he should not
himself need to come on to the community for assistance.
(b) According to some, Rebbi Yesheivav stopped his colleague from spending
more than a fifth for Tzedakah; according to others, it was he who was
stopped by his colleague - whose name was Rebbi Akiva.
(c) The proof from Ya'akov Avinu's statement "Aser A'asrenu Lach" initially
appears inaccurate - because a tenth plus a tenth of what remains is not
equivalent to a fifth of the total.
(d) In order to reinstate it - we explain Aser A'asrenu" to mean, not a
tenth plus a tenth of what remains - but a tenth plus a tenth that is
equivalent to the first one.
(a) The significance of the Si'man (regarding the three statement of Rebbi
Ila'a) 'Ketanim Kasvu u'Bizbezu' - is to remind us of the regressive
sequence of names in Rebbi Ila'as three statement: firstly (his statement
concerning one's small children - 'Ketanim') quoting Resh Lakish in the name
of Rebbi Yehudah bar Chin'na; secondly (his statement concerning someone who
writes all his property to his sons - 'Kasvu') quoting just Resh Lakish;
thirdly (his statement concerning not squandering more than a fifth -
'Bizbezu)' just in his own name.
(b) Rav Yitzchak cites another Takanah that they established in Usha;
namely - that a man should perservere with his son's learning until he
reaches the age of twelve. Then he should come down on him with a heavy
hand, using corporal punishment and depriving him of food, to encourage him
to learn more diligently.
(c) Rav told Rav Shmuel bar Shilas (a children's Rebbe) - not to accept a
child under six in Cheder, but from then on to stuff him with Torah like an
(d) We initially differentiate between 'stuffing him like an ox' and using
punishment as an aid to teaching. Alternatively - we distinguish between his
Rebbe stuffing him Torah she'bi'Ch'sav (which his father began learning with
at five - see Tosfos DH 've'Safi' and) which begins at six, and Mishnah,
where (where one only begins learning with him at ten, and where) stuffing
him at the age of twelve (see Tosfos DH 'Bar').
(a) Abaye's nanny taught him many things. The age that a child should begin
learning Mikra (with a Rebbe) is six, she told him. The correct age for
beginning to teach him Mishnah - is ten.
(b) The minimum age to begin fasting full-day ...
- ... for a boy - is twelve.
- ... for a girl - is eleven.
(a) A scorpion-sting is lethal (if left unattended) - during his first year.
(b) The antidote for this is the gall of a white vulture - to be smeared on
the sting and given to him to drink in beer.
(c) A wasp-sting too, is lethal on a baby in his first year. The antidote,
which is applied in the same way as the pervious one - is tendrils of a
date-palm in water.
(a) According to the first version of a statement of Rav Ketina, someone
who sends his son to Cheder before the age of six is heading for trouble.
According to the second version of his statement - he will such good
progress that he will leave all his friends behind.
(b) One might apply both versions of Rav Ketina's statement simultaneously -
if the child is both weak and sharp.
(c) Alternatively, the former version applies to a weak child, the latter
one, to a child who is strong.
(a) The Beis-Din of Usha instituted that, if a woman sold her Nichsei mi'Lug
during her husband's lifetime and died - her husband (whom they gave the Din
of the first buyer), may claim it from the buyers.
(b) When Rebbi Avahu told Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef that the master of Sugyos
regarding the Takanos of Usha was Rebbi Yossi bar Chanina - he made him
repeat it forty times, until he 'had it in his pocket'.
(c) The Rabbis of Yavneh or Rebbi Eliezer explain that the Pasuk in Tehilim,
which talks about someone who performs Tzedakah all the time, refers to
someone who feeds his small children. According to Rebbi Shmuel bar
Nachmeini - it refers to someone who raises an orphan in his house, and who
ultimately brings him (or her) under the Chupah.
(a) Rav Huna and Rav Chisda argue over the interpretation of the Pasuk in
Tehilim "Hon ve'Osher be'Veiso, ve'Tzidkaso Omedes La'ad". According to one
of them, it refers to someone who learns Torah and teaches it to others;
according to the other one - it refers to someone who writes Sifrei-Torah,
Nevi'im or Kesuvim and lends them to others.
(b) This Pasuk cannot refer to Tzedakah - because someone who gives
Tzedakah, no longer possesses it, whereas the Pasuk implies that even after
his good deed, he still retains his wealth.
(c) Another Pasuk in Tehilim says "u'Re'ei Vanim le'Vanecha, Shalom al
Yisrael". According to Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, this refers to the fact that
grandchildren dispense with the need for Chalitzah or Yibum (the cause of
much strife). According to Rebbi Shmuel bar Nachmeini - it dispenses with
the need for Beis-Din to issue rulings regarding inheritance (i.e. which
relatives are the closest heirs - another cause of much strife).
(a) Based on Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah's D'rashah in our Mishnah - Rav
Hamnuna compared the sustenance of the daughters to the inheritance of the
sons, to confine the latter to where their father left Karka (but not if he
left only Metaltelin) when he died (suggesting that heirs only inherit
(b) In fact, it was the Talmidim who misunderstood Rav Hamnuna. Rav Yosef
however, knew exactly that by 'inheritance of the sons' he meant
specifically 'K'suvas B'nin Dichrin' (as we explained in our Mishnah (49a.).
(c) In the event of the wife's subsequent death, if her husband had not left
her Karka (immobile property) - and there were children from another wife
(whose Kesuvah differed from the first one, or who had a different number of
children), then all the children would divide the property equally.
(a) Rav permitted some orphan-girls to claim 'me'Chiti de'Aliyah', from
wheat, which is Metaltelin (mobile property) after his death. 'de'Aliyah'
may refer to the Din of Shmuel, who said 'le'Parnasah Shamin be'Av' -
meaning that, in the event of a man's death, when his daughters claim their
dowries, we assess the father's generosity (the meaning of 'Aliyaso'
according to this interpretation), and give each daughter accordingly.
(b) Alternatively, 'de'Aliyah' refers to a statement of Rav Yitzchak bar
Yosef - who said that in the attic ('ba'Aliyah') they (Chazal) instituted to
sustain a man's daughters from Metaltelin.
(c) It is a Chidush to learn this second explanation - because of the
principle that the conditions of a K'suvah, like the K'suvah itself, can
only be claimed from Karka.
(d) We reject the proof from Rebbi Bana'i the brother of Rebbi Chiya bar
Aba, whom Shmuel instructed 'Zil *Zon*'! that Rav was referring to
*Mezonos* - because who is to say that 'Zon' does not refer to giving the
woman her dowry, and that Shmuel was merely following his own reasoning)?
(a) The Dayanim of Neherda'a claimed Mezonos (for the daughters) from
Metaltelin. When Rav Chana bar Bizna (and his Beis-Din) did likewise in
Pumbedisa - Rav Nachman threatened to take away their mansions unless they
(b) When Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi wanted to do the same thing, Rebbi Ya'akov
bar Idi pointed out to him that if Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish did not
deign to do it, how could he! When Rebbi Elazar wanted to do likewise -
Rebbi Shimon ben Elyakim commented that although his ruling stemmed from a
merciful heart, he should rescind, for fear that his Talmidim might fix the
Halachah like him.
(c) When Rav Yosef instructed an orphan to sustain his sister from the dates
lying on the mats, Abaye objected that one wouldn't even give Metaltelin to
a creditor - because even *he* cannot claim from the Metaltelin of orphans
(only from the Karka that their father left them).
(d) The advantage that a creditor has over a daughter (in this respect) is -
that *he* can claim his debt from Meshabadim (from people who purchased from
the father), whereas *they* cannot.
(a) Rav Yosef replied that he did not mean the dates that were actually
lying on the mats - but the dates that were ripe and almost ready to pick
(but still attached).
(b) Abaye objected further - that fruit that is ready to pick is considered
as if it is already picked (in which case, the dates were considered
(c) Rav Yosef concluded that - he meant dates that were virtually ripe, but
which still needed the tree to ripen fully.