Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) LANGUAGES OF KIDUSHIN

(a) (Beraisa): 'You are my wife' or ,'You are my betrothed', or 'You are acquired to me' - she is Mekudeshes;
(b) 'You are mine', 'You are in my domain', 'You are Zekukah (in need of) me' - she is Mekudeshes.
(c) Question: Why didn't the Beraisa teach all 6 cases in 1 clause?
(d) Answer: The Tana first heard the first 3 cases, and taught them; he later heard the latter 3, and appended them.
(e) Question: What is the law in the following: 'You are Meyuchedes (special) to me', 'You are Meyu'edes (designated) for me', 'You are my helpmate', 'You are opposite me', 'You are Atzurasi (my gathered one)', 'You are Tzalasi (my side)', 'You are Segurasi (closed off to me)', 'You are under me', 'You are Tefusasi (the one I took)', 'You are Lekuchasi (my taken one)'?
(f) Answer (to the last question - Beraisa): 'You are Lekuchasi' - she is Mekudeshes, as it says 'When a man will take a woman'.
(g) Question: What is the law if he says 'You are my Charufah'?
(h) Answer (Beraisa): If he says 'You are my Charufah' she is Mekudeshes, because the Torah speaks this way - "And she is a slave Charufah to a man";

1. Also, in Yehudah, a woman who is Mekudeshes is called Charufah.
2. Question: Since the Torah speaks this way, why must we bring support from the way people speak in Yehudah?
3. Answer: Rather, the Beraisa means: One who says 'You are my Charufah' in Yehudah, she is Mekudeshes, because in Yehudah, a woman is called Charufah when she is Mekudeshes.

(i) Question: What is the case of the languages by which we asked above?

1. If he was not talking with her about engagement - how would she know that he intends to engage her?
2. If he was talking with her about engagement - he does not need to say any more!

i. (Mishnah): A man was talking with a woman about divorce or engagement, and gave her a Get or engagement money without specifying (that he intends to divorce or engage her) - R. Yosi says, it works; R. Yehudah says, he must specify.
ii. (Rav Huna): The law is as R. Yosi.

(j) Answer: The case is, he was talking with her about engagement; indeed, had he given the money silently, she would be Mekudeshes.

1. If he said one of the doubtful languages, we are not sure if he meant to engage her or to employ her; these questions are unresolved.

(k) (Mishnah): A man was talking with a woman about divorce or engagement, and gave her a Get or engagement money without specifying - R. Yosi says, it works; R. Yehudah says, he must specify.

1. (Rav Yehudah and R. Elazar): The case is, they were discussing the divorce or engagement (right before he gave it to her).
2. (Later) Tana'im argue whether R. Yosi and R. Yehudah indeed argued in this case.

i. (Beraisa - Rebbi): The case is, they were discussing the divorce or engagement; R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon says, even if they were not discussing it.
ii. Question: If he was not talking with her about engagement - how would she know that he intends to engage her?
iii. Answer (Abaye): They were discussing the divorce or engagement, then they were discussing related matters and he gave to her.

3. (Rav Huna): The law is as R. Yosi.

(l) (Rav Yehudah): Anyone that is not an expert in divorce and engagement should not rule on such matters.
(m) Question (Rav Yemar): Must one know even Rav Huna's ruling?
(n) Answer (Rav Ashi): Yes.

(a) (Beraisa): Similarly regarding divorce: if a man gave his wife a Get and said 'You are sent', or 'You are divorced', or 'You are permitted to any man' - she is divorced.
(b) Clearly, if he (gave her a Get and) said 'You are a free woman', this has no effect;

(c) If he told his slave 'You are permitted to any man', this has no effect.
(d) Question: What if he told his wife 'You are to yourself'?

1. Does he mean, 'You may keep your earnings'?
2. Or, does he mean, you are entirely to yourself (i.e. divorced from me)?

(e) Answer (Ravina - Beraisa): The essence of a Get of freedom is 'You are free', or 'You are to yourself'.

1. The language 'You are to yourself' works even by a slave, whose very body belongs to his master - all the more so, it works by a wife, for her husband does not own her!

(f) Question (Ravina): A master told his slave 'I have no involvement with you' - what is the law?

1. Does he mean, 'I have no involvement with you' at all (and you are free)?
2. Or, does he mean, 'I will not make you work for me'?

(g) Answer (Rav Nachman - Mishnah): One who sells his slave to a Nochri, the original master must free the slave with a document;
(h) R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, if the original master wrote Ono, no other document is needed.

1. (Rav Sheshes): An Ono says 'If you flee from your new master, I have no involvement with you'.

(a) (Abaye): If a man was Mekadesh a woman with a loan, she is not Mekudeshes;

1. If he was Mekadesh her with the benefit of a loan, she is Mekudeshes, but this is forbidden because it is a ruse for usury.
2. Question: What is the case of benefit of a loan?

i. Suggestion: He lent her 4 coins on condition that she repay 5, and he engages her with the fifth coin.
ii. Rejection #1: That is absolute interest, not just a ruse!
iii. Rejection #2: That is the same as the case of a loan (which does not work)!

3. Answer: Rather, he granted her an extension on her loan (Rashi; Tosfos - he paid her creditor to grant her an extension).

(b) (Rava): 'Here is money on condition that you return it to me' - this is not a valid acquisition with money, it does not make engagement, and it does not redeem a firstborn son;

1. One fulfills the Mitzvah of giving Terumah even if he stipulates that the Kohen return it;
2. However, this is forbidden, for it is as a Kohen that helps work in the granary in exchange for receiving Terumah.

(c) Objection #1: No matter how Rava holds, this is difficult!

1. If a gift on condition to return it is considered a gift - it should work in all the cases!
2. If it is not considered a gift - it should not make engagement either!

(d) Objection #2: We may infer that Rava holds that it is considered a gift!

1. (Rava): 'This Esrog is yours on condition that you return it to me' - if the recipient returns it, he fulfilled the Mitzvah; if not, he did not fulfill the Mitzvah.

(e) (Rav Ashi): Rather, such a gift works in all cases, except for engagement, because it resembles the acquisition of Chalipin (exchange), which cannot engage.
(f) (Rav Huna Mar brei d'Nechemyah): I have heard that Rava actually learned as you said.