Previous daf

1)

(a) How did that woman deny her husband access to her property?

(b) What did Rav Nachman do when her daughter produced the relevant document?

(c) What complaint did Rav Anan lodge with Mar Ukva?

(d) In reply, Mar Ukva quoted Rav Chanilai.
What did he quote Shmuel as saying?

(a) How did Rava think one ought to qualify the Din of a Sh'tar Mavrachta?

(b) What did Rav Nachman answer him?

(a) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel in a Beraisa advises a woman who wants to deny her husband access to her property, to write a Sh'tar Pasim. What is a Sh'tar Pasim?

(b) According to Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, the document is valid, exactly the way it is written.
What do the Chachamim say?

(c) Why does this Beraisa pose a Kashya on Shmuel?

(d) How does Rebbi Zeira resolve the Kashya?

5)

(a) What does one do with money or detached fruit that a married woman inherits? Why is that?

(b) According to Rebbi Meir, if she inherited a field with the fruit already grown, the husband must pay her however much the value of the field has increased due to the fruit. What does she do with the money? Why is that?

(c) According to the Chachamim, attached fruit belongs to the husband.
Why is that?

(d) What is Rebbi Shimon referring to when he says that ...

1. ... whenever he has the upper-hand at the time when his wife inherits the property, he has the lower-hand when he divorces her?
2. ... whenever he has the lower-hand at the time when his wife inherits the property, he has the upper-hand when he divorces her?

(a) We take for granted that if a woman inherits a large sum of money with which she wants to buy houses, whereas her husband wants to buy land, or vice-versa, she buys land.
Why is that?

(b) Why, by the same token, are houses preferable to date-palms?

(c) What is the order of priorities if it is a question of purchasing trees, date-palms or vines?

(d) If the woman inherited a forest of Uzradin (a kind of cheap fruit - known as sperling) or a fish-pond, some consider the fruit and the fish (respectively) as fruit, others as capital.
What is the reason of those who consider it as ...

1. ... fruit?
2. ... capital? So what does one then do with it?

8)

(a) According to Rebbi Oshaya Amar Rebbi Yanai, who receives the double-payment if someone steals the baby of an animal of Nechsei mi'Lug?
Why do we initially think that is?

(b) According to the Tana Kama of a Beraisa, the baby of an animal of Nichsei mi'Lug belongs to the husband; of a Shifchah mi'Lug, to the wife. What does Chananya the son of Yashiyah's brother say about the baby of an animal of Nechsei mi'Lug?

(c) How do we reconcile both opinions with Rebbi Oshaya Amar Rebbi Yanai, in whose opinion the double-payment goes to the woman?

(a) On what basis does Chananyah consider both the baby of animals and of Shefachos mi'Lug, Peiros?

(b) How do we account for the Chachamim, who consider the former, Peiros, but the latter, capital?

(c) Shmuel rules like Chananyah.
On what basis does Chananyah concede that, should the woman become divorced, she may claim the children of her Shifchah?

(d) Is she obligated to pay for them?

(a) What ruling did Rav Rava Amar Rav Nachman issue with regard to a woman who brings into the marriage a goat for its milk, a sheep for its wool, a chicken for its eggs or a date-palm for its fruit? What is his reason for this?

(b) According to Rav Nachman, the Peiros of a coat that she brings into the marriage is its use.
Why is this considered Peiros?

(c) Why does the Tana of the Beraisa consider salt-pools (beside the sea) and sand-deposits (for building) Peiros?

(d) Rebbi Meir considers deposits of sulfur and of alum, capital.
What do the Chachamim say?

(a) How does the opinion of the Chachamim (that we just quoted) prove the opinion of Rava Amar Rav Nachman?

(b) What is the difference between this case and that of a woman who brings in money or detached fruit in our Mishnah? Why are they considered capital?

(c) All this is speaking about Nechsei mi'Lug.
What is the difference between Nichsei mi'Lug and Nichsei Tzon Barzel?

(d) Rebbi Shimon says in our Mishnah that whenever the husband has the upper-hand at the time when his wife inherits the property, he has the lower-hand when he divorces her, and whenever he has the lower-hand at the time when his wife inherits the property, he has the upper-hand when he divorces her. It is clear that the Chachamim agree with Rebbi Shimon with regard to fruit that is detached when he divorces her (which obviously goes to him).
In which case then, do they argue with him?

(a) Old Avadim and Shefachos are considered capital because of the likelihood of them dying. Consequently, says the Tana Kama, they are sold, and with the proceeds, she buys land. Similarly, should the woman inherit old olive-trees and vines, she sells them, too.
What does ...

1. ... Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say with regard to old Avadim and Shefachos?
2. ... Rebbi Yehudah say with regard to old olive-trees and vines?

(b) Rav Kahana Amar Rav establishes the Machlokes Tana'im (regarding the old olive-trees and vines) when they fell to her in her own field.
What will even Rebbi Yehudah then say in the event that they fell to her in someone else's field?

(c) What problem does Rav Yosef have with the Reisha of our Mishnah?

(d) So how do we amend Rav Kahana Amar Rav's statement?

(a) What will be the Din if a man spends a lot of money improving his wife's fields, but divorces her having reaped little benefit from it.
May he reclaim the difference from his wife?

(b) What will be the Din if he spent money but obtains no benefit at all in return?

(c) According to Rebbi Asi, even if he ate as little as a dried fig, that falls under the category of 'little benefit'.
What condition does he require for this to be considered benefit at all?

Next daf