Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) CAN A BOY BE MARRIED?

(a) .Question (Reish Lakish): Can a man Meya'ed his Amah to his son if his son is a minor?

1. The Torah only said 'to his son' - any son!
2. Or - perhaps the son must be as the father, i.e. an adult.

(b) Answer #1 (R. Zeira - Beraisa): "A man" - this excludes a minor; "that will have adultery with the wife of a man" -this excludes the wife of a minor.

1. If Yi'ud to a minor works - one can find the wife of a minor!

(c) Objection: If Yi'ud to a minor is invalid - why must the verse exclude the wife of a minor!

1. Rather, we conclude that Yi'ud to a minor is valid!

(d) Rejection (Rav Ashi): No - the verse excludes a Yevamah that did Yibum with a minor above 9.

1. Since she falls to him to Yibum, and his marital relations are considered relations, one might have thought she becomes his full wife and one who has relations with her is killed - we hear, this is not so.

(e) Answer #2 (R. Aibo): Yi'ud can only be with an adult; Yi'ud requires Da'as (understanding).
(f) Question: Why must he say both - only adults have understanding!
(g) Answer #1: He means, Yi'ud can only be with an adult because Yi'ud requires understanding.
(h) Answer #2: Yi'ud requires her Da'as.

1. (Abaye brei d'R. Avahu - Beraisa): "Ya'adah" - he must inform her that he is doing Yi'ud.
2. (Abaye brei d'R. Avahu): This is as R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah, who says that the money paid for an Amah was not given for engagement (therefore, she must agree to Yi'ud).
3. (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): We understand the Beraisa even if the money paid for an Amah was given for engagement - the Torah decreed that he must inform her!

(a) Question: Where did R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah speak of the money for an Amah?
(b) Answer (Beraisa - R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah): "Ya'adah v'Hefdah" - when he makes Yi'ud, she must be fitting to be redeemed.

1. Yi'ud only works if it there is enough time left (in her 6 years of service) for her to do a Perutah's worth of labor.

i. Inference: This is because the initial money was not given for engagement (and he now engages her with the value of the work she must still do for him).
ii. Rejection (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): Really, he can hold that the money was given for engagement; the Torah decreed that Yi'ud only works if she was fitting to be redeemed.

(c) (Rava): From R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah, we learn that (even according to Chachamim) a man can authorize his daughter to receive her own engagement money.

1. He holds that the initial money was not given for engagement (and he now engages her with the value of the work she must still do for him);
2. It must be, a man can authorize his daughter to receive her own engagement money (even without selling her)!

(d) (Rava): From R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah, we learn that (even according to Chachamim) a man can engage a woman with a loan on which he has collateral.

1. He holds that the initial money was not given for engagement; he engages her with the work she owes him);

i. She herself is collateral for her debt.

2. It must be, a man can engage (any) woman with a loan on which he has collateral!

(e) (Beraisa #1): To make Yi'ud, a man tells her in front of 2: 'You are engaged to me'; this may be at the end of the 6 years, just before sundown.

1. He then conducts with her as a wife, not as a slave.
2. R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah says, she is engaged only if enough time remained for her to do a Perutah' worth of work.
3. A parable: This is as when Reuven tells Leah 'You are engaged to me from now, after 30 days'; within the 30 days, David engaged her - she is engaged to Reuven.
4. Question: Which Tana learns the law in the parable from Yi'ud (Rashi; Tosfos - learns Yi'ud from the parable)?

i. Suggestion: If R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah - but he says that she is engaged only if enough time remained for her to do a Perutah' worth of work!

5. Answer (Rav Acha brei d'Rava): Rather, it is according to Chachamim.
6. Question: This is obvious!
7. [Version #1 (Rashi) Answer: A master does not say that he is engaging her from the moment he buys her - one might have thought, even if Reuven did not say that he engages her from now, his engagement will prevail - we hear, this is not so.]
8. [Version #2 (Tosfos) Answer: A master does not say that he is engaging her from the moment he buys her - one might have thought, if a stranger engaged an Amah during her service, she is engaged to him - we hear, this is not so. (Rather, every sale of an Amah is as if he said 'on condition that engagement will begin from now, if I later make Yi'ud'.)

(f) (Beraisa #2 - R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah): Shimon sold his daughter to Kalev, then engaged her to Moshe - she is engaged to Moshe;
(g) Chachamim say, if Kalev wants to do Yi'ud, this prevails over Moshe's engagement.
(h) A parable: This is as when Reuven tells Leah 'You are engaged to me after 30 days'; within the 30 days, David engaged her - she is engaged to David.
(i) Question: Which Tana learns the law in the parable from Yi'ud (Rashi; Tosfos - learns Yi'ud from the parable)?

1. Suggestion: If Chachamim - but they say that the master can do Yi'ud if he wants!

(j) Answer (Rav Acha brei d'Rava): Rather, it is according to R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah.
(k) Question: This is obvious!
(l) [Version #1 (Rashi) Answer: A master does not say that he may later engage her (therefore, Yi'ud is not retroactive) - one might have thought, when a man engages a woman to take effect in 30 days, it works retroactively - we hear, this is not so.]
(m) [Version #2 (Tosfos) Answer: A master does not say that engagement should not start now (rather, only after he does Yi'ud) - one might have thought, Yi'ud makes engagement retroactively - we hear, this is not so.]

(a) (Beraisa - R. Meir): Reuven sold his daughter and stipulated that the master will not do Yi'ud - the stipulation is valid;
(b) Chachamim say, he may do Yi'ud, for a stipulation contrary to Torah is void.
(c) Question: Does R. Meir really hold that the stipulation is valid?

1. (Beraisa - R. Meir): One who tells a woman 'You are engaged to me on condition that I have no obligation to give you food, clothing or regular relations' - she is engaged, the stipulation is void;
2. R. Yehudah says, in monetary matters, the stipulation is valid.

(d) Answer (Chizkiyah): An Amah is an exception, for the Torah said "As an Amah" - a sale is valid even if it is only to be an Amah (and cannot result in Yi'ud).
(e) Question: What do Chachamim learn from the verse?
(f) Answer (Beraisa): "As an Amah" - this teaches that a girl may be sold to disqualified men (of improper lineage, that are forbidden to marry a Bas Yisrael - then, the sale is only that she should be an Amah).

1. Question: Why is a verse needed - a Kal va'Chomer teaches that he can sell her to such men!

i. A man can engage his daughter to such men - all the more so, he van sell her to such a man!

2. Answer: We cannot learn from engagement, for sometimes a man can engage his daughter even though he cannot sell her, e.g. when she is a Na'arah.

i. Therefore, it needed to write "As an Amah".

(g) R. Eliezer says, we already know that she can be sold to men of improper lineage - "If she will be bad in the eyes of her master", i.e. it is forbidden to marry her.

1. "As an Amah" teaches that she may be sold to relatives (with whom engagement does not take effect).
2. Question: Why is a verse needed - a Kal va'Chomer teaches this!

i. If he can sell her to disqualified men, all the more so to relatives!

3. Answer: That is not a Kal va'Chomer - he can sell her to disqualified men, because they can do Yi'ud (albeit it is forbidden);

i. This does not show that she can be sold to relatives, who cannot do Yi'ud even b'Di'eved!
ii. Therefore, we need "As an Amah":

(h) R. Meir used "As an Amah" to teach about a stipulation not to do Yi'ud - he learns that she may be sold to disqualified men as R. Eliezer learns;

1. He learns that she may not be sold to relatives, as Chachamim.

(i) (Beraisa #1): A man may sell his daughter to his father, but not to his son;
(j) (Beraisa #2): He may not sell her to his father nor to his son.
(k) We understand Beraisa #2 - it is as Chachamim.
(l) Question: Beraisa #1 is not as R. Eliezer, nor as Chachamim!
(m) Answer: It is as Chachamim - they admit that a girl may be sold as long as the master or his son could do Yi'ud. (She may be sold to her grandfather, for she can marry his son (her uncle), but not her brother, for she is forbidden to him and his son (her nephew).)