Previous daf

1)

(a) The Tana of our Mishnah states that a woman may claim her Kesuvah with her Get alone.
What do we initially think (she claimed) happened to her Kesuvah?

(b) Why is her husband not believed to counter that he already paid and that she returned the Kesuvah and he tore it up?

(c) How do Beis-Din prevent her from claiming it a second time with her Get?

(a) If she claims her Kesuvah with her Sh'tar Kesuvah (claiming that she lost her Get) and her husband counters that he already paid, but that he lost his receipt, Beis-Din do not uphold her claim.
In what way does a 'Ba'al-Chov' have a parallel Din to this one?

(b) What is a P'ruzbul?

(c) Why do both the woman and the creditor lose their claims?

(a) What concession did Raban Shimon ben Gamliel make from the time of the Sakanah and onwards?

(b) What does 'the time of the Sakanah' mean? Why did he find it necessary to make this concession?

(c) How do we try to prove from the Reisha of our Mishnah that one writes a receipt?

(d) How does Rav initially dispense with this problem?

(a) According to Shmuel, the Tana is speaking in a place where it is customary to write a Sh'tar Kesuvah.
Why do we not want to establish that our Tana holds 'Kosvin Shover'?

(b) What is the reason of those who hold 'Ein Kosvin Shover'?

(a) How did Shmuel explain our Mishnah to Rav Anan to answer why, if one does not write a receipt, we are not afraid that she will later produce her Kesuvah against the heirs and claim again?

(b) Rav finally retracts and agrees with Shmuel that our Mishnah can speak either way. How does Rav differentiate between whether she claims with her Get or with her Kesuvah?

(c) What did Rav mean when he concluded 'Whoever wants to come and ask, let him do so'!

(a) What is the problem with Rav from the Seifa of our Mishnah, where she produces a Kesuvah, claiming that she lost her Get ... , yet the Tana prohibits her from claiming?

(b) Why is this not a problem with Shmuel? What would the Tana be afraid of?

(c) To answer the Kashya against Rav, Yosef establishes our Mishnah when there are no witnesses that the woman is divorced.
How does this answer the Kashya?

7)

(a) We just established our Mishnah according to Rav, when there are no witnesses that she is divorced. What is the problem with that from the Seifa, where, from the time of Sakanah and onwards, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel permits a woman to claim without a Get?

(b) How do we then establish our Mishnah to accommodate Rav's opinion?

(c) What did Rav reply when Rav Kahana and Rav Asi asked him that, seeing as a divorcee claims her basic Kesuvah with her Get, how does a widow claim her's?

(d) Why are we not then afraid that ...

1. ... really she was divorced, and that she will later produce her Get, and claim her Kesuvah again in a different Beis-Din?
2. ... her husband divorced her just before he died?

(a) All of the above is fine when we are talking about a widow from *the marriage*, who was living with her husband.
But how will we avoid the same fear in the case of a widow from *the betrothal*, where they were not living together? How do we know that she was not divorced?

(b) How do we prove this from the case of the witnesses who testify that her husband died?

(c) Which cases does this answer cover?

(a) Mar Keshisha Brei de'Rav Chisda asked Rav Ashi from where we know that a widow from the Eirusin receives a Kesuvah.
Why is there no proof from the Mishnah in 'Af-al-Pi', which specifically states that a widow or a divorcee from the betrothal as well as from the marriage, may claim her entire Kesuvah?

(b) What will be the Chidush if the Mishnah is speaking specifically when he wrote her a Kesuvah?

(c) What proof do we have from the actual statement that the Tana is speaking in such a case?

(a) Why is there no proof for our She'eilah, from the Beraisa, which states 'Meisah, Einah Yorshah, Meis Hu, Govah K'suvasah'?

(b) What will be the Chidush if the Mishnah is speaking when he wrote her a Kesuvah?

(c) From where do we know that a man does not inherit his Arusah?

(a) Rav Nachman asked Rav Huna why, according to Rav (who maintains that with the Get, the woman may claim the basic Kesuvah), we are not afraid that she will claim her Kesuvah in one Beis-Din, and then claim it again in another Beis-Din.
Why could he not answer that one tears-up her Get after the first claim?

(b) So what *did* he reply?

(a) If a woman has two Gitin and two Kesuvos, she may claim with each of the Kesuvos.
Under which condition is that? How must the Kesuvos be dated?

(b) How many Kesuvos may she claim if she has ...

1. ... two Kesuvos and one Get?
2. ... one Kesuvah and two Gitin? What is the case?
3. ... one Kesuvah, a Get and Eidei Misah?

(c) What is the reason for these two latter Halachos?

(d) Under which circumstances (in the latter case), will she be able to claim two Kesuvos?

(a) What do we infer from the second case in our Mishnah, which permits the woman to claim one Kesuvah from either of the two documents?

(b) Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel rules that if someone produces two documents on the same debt, he may only claim with the latter one.
What is the Halachic significance of this statement?

(c) We reconcile this with the inference that we just made from our Mishnah with a statement by Rav Papa qualifying Rav Nachman.
What does he say?

Next daf