Previous daf

1)

(a) We just learned from "Kol Cherem" to include even the less stringent Misos (she'Nitnu Shigegasan le'Kaparah) in the prohibition of accepting money to spare them from death.
But surely we know that already from the Pasuk "ve'Lo Sikchu Kofer le'Nefesh Rotzei'ach"?

(b) We refute this however, on the basis of the Hekesh of Bei Chizkiyah. Which Hekesh?

(c) Now that we have the Hekesh, why do we need the Pasuk "ve'Lo Yihyeh Ason" to teach us 'Ha im Yihyeh Ason, Lo Ye'anesh'?

(a) Rami bar Chama establishes the need to preclude from Misah and Mamon, because from "ve'Lo Yihyeh Ason" we would only know to exempt someone who, for example, blinded someone's eye and killed him with the same stroke, but not when he blinded him with one stroke, and killed him simultaneously with the other hand.
On what grounds do we reject Rami bar Chami's explanation?

(b) So Rav Ashi explains the need for "Kol Cherem" to teach us that someone who is Chayav Misah is even Patur from paying K'nas (although we already know it by Mamon).
Why would we require a special Pasuk by K'nas?

(c) Why will Rav Ashi's answer not work according to Rabah?

(d) So how will Rabah explain the need for the Pasuk "Kol Cherem"?

(a) According to Rebbi Yossi ha'G'lili, someone who rapes a girl who was betrothed but is now divorced, is Patur from K'nas.
Then how will we explain the first Mishnah in the Perek, which obligates someone who rapes the wife of his brother or of his father's brother to pay K'nas?

(b) What does Rebbi Yossi ha'G'lili learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei (in connection with K'nas) "Asher Lo Orasah"?

(c) How does Rebbi Akiva Darshen this Pasuk?

(a) What do we Darshen from the word ...

1. ... "Na'arah"?
2. ... "Besulah"?

(b) How does this D'rashah dispense with the D'rashah that we just made to explain Rebbi Akiva?

(c) From where does he learn that? Rebbi Akiva in a Beraisa maintains that the K'nas of a girl who was betrothed and is now divorced, goes to her father

(d) And he uses the Pasuk "Asher Lo Orasah" to learn a 'Gezeirah-Shavah (from Mefateh, where the same phrase appears).
What does the Gezeirah-Shavah come to teach us?

5)

(a) We have just used "Asher Lo Orasah" for a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' (so that a Na'arah who was betrothed and is now divorced remains subject to K'nas) according to Rebbi Akiva, and precluded a Be'ulah from the word "Besulah". How do we know not to do the opposite (to learn the same 'Gezeirah-Shavah' from "Besulah" "Besulah", so that a Be'ulah remains subject to K'nas), and preclude a Na'arah who was betrothed and is now divorced from "Asher Lo Orasah"?

(b) From where does Rebbi Yossi ha'G'lili learn that the fine by both an O'nes and a Mefutah is fifty Shekalim) seeing as he does not agree with Rebbi Akiva's Gezeirah-Shavah'?

(a) We now have two opinions in Rebbi Akiva regarding the K'nas of an Arusah she'Nisgarshah.
What does he hold ...

1. ... in our Mishnah?
2. ... in the Beraisa?

(b) Why does his opinion in our Mishnah initially appear to be more sound than the one in the Beraisa?

(c) How does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak resolve that problem?

(d) Seeing as, both in the Mishnah and in the Beraisa, Rebbi Akiva uses the Pasuk for its inference, how can he also learn a G'zeirah-Shavah from it?

(a) Why do we need a Pasuk for Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak's D'rashah, seeing as the man who raped her is already Chayav Misah?

(b) How about Rabah, who holds that, since K'nas is a Chidush, one does indeed pay even though he is Chayav Misah?

(a) The Tana Kama of the Beraisa says 'K'nasah le'Avihah'.
What does Yesh Omrim (Rebbi Nasan) say?

(b) What is the problem with the Beraisa the way it stands?

(c) How does Rav Chisda resolve the problem? Who is the author of the Beraisos? What is the basis of the Machlokes?

(a) What does Abaye learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "ve'Nasan la'Avi ha'Na'arah"?

(b) What does Rava say about that?

Next daf