POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Kidushin 64
KIDUSHIN 61-65 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
1) WHAT IS A FATHER BELIEVED ABOUT
(a) (Mishnah): A man said 'I was Mekadesh my daughter', 'I
was Mekadesh her and received her Get' - if she is still
a minor (or Na'arah), he is believed;
2) WHEN IS A DYING MAN BELIEVED
(b) If he says that he was Mekadesh her or received her Get
when she was a minor, and now she is an adult (Bogeres),
he is not believed.
(c) 'She was captured and I redeemed her (so she is forbidden
to Kohanim)" - he is never believed.
(d) (Gemara) Question: Why is he believed when she is a
minor, and not when she is an adult?
(e) Answer #1: When she is a minor, he can marry her off, so
he is believed about this;
1. When she is an adult, he cannot do this; and he is
never allowed to hand her over to captors (so he is
not believed about these).
(f) Objection (Rav Ashi): The father is not believed in the
beginning of the Mishnah because it is in his power - he
is believed by divorce, and this is not his decision!
2. Question: But he can forbid (a minor) to Kohanim in
another way, he can marry her to a Chalal!
3. Answer: No, our Mishnah is as R. Dusta'i ben
Yehudah, who says that children of Chalal married to
a Bas Yisrael are not Chalalim (and she remains
permitted to Kohanim).
4. Question: But he can forbid (a minor) to Kohanim by
marrying her to a Mamzer!
5. Answer: No, our Mishnah is as R. Akiva, who says
that Kidushin does not take effect when relations
are forbidden by a Lav.
6. Question: But according to R. Simai, even R. Akiva
admits that he can marry her (if she is widowed) to
a Kohen Gadol, and this will forbid her to Kohanim!
i. (Beraisa - R. Simai): R. Akiva says that
children from all forbidden marriages are
Mamzerim, except for a widow that marries a
Kohen Gadol, for there the Torah said "He will
not take...he will not profane";
7. Answer: Our Mishnah is as R. Yeshevav, who says that
R. Akiva says that any forbidden relationship with a
Yisraeli produces Mamzerim.
ii. He makes his children profaned (Chalalim), not
i. This answer works if R. Yeshevav's statement
stands on its own (and applies in all cases).
ii. Question: If R. Yeshevav came to argue on R.
Simai - he only speaks of Chayavei Lavin of
Kohanim, but he admits that relations forbidden
by an Aseh do not make Mamzerim! (A man could
marry his daughter off in such a marriage to
1. Also - he cannot force a man to marry his daughter!
(g) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Regarding Kidushin and divorce, the
Torah believed the father.
1. (Rav Huna): "I gave my daughter to this man" - this
teaches that a man is believed about his daughter's
i. When he said 'I gave' - he forbids her;
2. The Torah believed the father regarding Kidushin,
not regarding captivity.
ii. When he said 'to this man' - he permits her to
(a) (Mishnah): A man said as he was dying 'I have children'
(so my wife will not fall to Yibum) - he is believed;
1. If he said 'I have brothers' (so she will fall to
Yibum), he is not believed.
(b) (Gemara): We see, he is believed to permit, not to
(c) Suggestion: Our Mishnah is not as R. Noson.
1. (Beraisa - Rebbi): At the time of Kidushin, Reuven
said 'I have no children'; at the time of death he
said 'I have children';
(d) Rejection #1 (Rava): In the Beraisa is different - since
as he dies he contradicts what he said earlier, he surely
is not lying.
2. Or - at the time of Kidushin, Reuven said 'I have no
brothers; at the time of death he said 'I have
brothers' - he is believed to permit not to forbid;
i. R. Noson says, he is even believed to forbid.
(e) Objection (Abaye): All the more so we should be concerned
that he is lying!
1. In the Mishnah, even though he doesn't contradict
himself, he is not believed to forbid - all the more
so in the Beraisa, when he contradicts himself, he
should not be believed to forbid!
(f) Rejection #2 (Abaye): In the Mishnah we had a Chazakah
that the man had no children or brothers (so his wife
will not fall to Yibum). When he says that he has
children, this supports the Chazakah (regarding his
wife), so he is believed;
1. When he says that he has brothers, this opposes the
Chazakah (regarding his wife), so he is not
(g) In the Beraisa we had a Chazakah that the man had
brothers but no children (so his wife will fall to
Yibum). He would not lie to exempt her from Yibum (at the
time of Kidushin) - he could divorce her (Rashi -
immediately; Tosfos - he could write a Get now, to
divorce her right before he dies).
3) UNSPECIFIED KIDUSHIN
1. Rebbi holds, this logic (he would not lie if he can
accomplish his end without lying) is as strong as
witnesses, it overturns the original Chazakah (so he
is not believed to say as he dies that she falls to
2. R. Noson, this logic is only as strong as a
Chazakah, it does not override the original Chazakah
(so he is believed to forbid her as he dies).
(a) (Mishnah): A man was Mekadesh his daughter without
specifying which one - we are sure, he did not Mekadesh
his adult (Bogeres) daughters.
4) ENTERING DOUBTFUL SITUATIONS
(b) R. Meir says, a man has 2 sets of daughters (i.e. from
different wives). He remembers being Mekadesh his big
daughter - he is unsure if this was the oldest of the
older set, or the oldest of the younger set, or the
youngest of the older set who is older than all of the
younger set - all are doubtfully Mekudashos, except for
the youngest of the younger set;
1. R. Yosi says, he was definitely Mekadesh the oldest
of the older set.
(c) R. Meir says, if he was Mekadesh his little daughter, but
is unsure if this was the youngest of the younger set, or
the youngest of the older set, or the oldest of the
younger set who is younger than all of the older set -
all are doubtfully Mekudashos, except for the older of
the older set;
1. R. Yosi says, he was definitely Mekadesh the
youngest of the younger set.
(d) (Gemara) Inference: We are sure, he did not Mekadesh his
adult daughters - but his minor daughters are doubtfully
1. This shows that Kidushin which forbids relations is
(e) Rejection: No - the case is, there is only 1 adult
daughter and 1 minor daughter.
1. The plural language (adult daughters) refers to
whenever this occurs, the adult daughter is always
(f) (Mishnah): A man has 2 sets of daughters...
2. Question: This is obvious (the father cannot
Mekadesh his adult daughter)!
3. Answer: The case is, she made him an agent to
i. We learn that a man would surely do something
he benefits from (he keeps the Kidushin money
for his minor daughter), not something he does
not benefit from.
ii. Question: Doesn't the Mishnah also include when
the adult daughter told her father that he can
keep her Kidushin money?
iii. Answer: Still, a man would surely do a Mitzvah
incumbent on him, (to Mekadesh his minor
daughter), rather than something not incumbent
on him (being Mekadesh his adult daughter).
(g) It is necessary to hear by Kidushin of his big daughter
and of his small daughter.
1. If we only heard by 'my big daughter' - one might
have thought, R. Meir holds that any daughter that
is not the youngest of all, he calls his big
daughter - but he would admit, he would only call
the very youngest 'my small daughter';
2. If we only heard by 'my small daughter' - one might
have thought, R. Yosi holds that he only calls the
very youngest 'my small daughter' - but he admits,
any daughter that is not the youngest of all, he
calls 'my big daughter'.
(a) Question: May we infer that R. Meir holds that a person
(has intention that causes him to) be in doubtful
situations, and R. Yosi says he does not?!
(b) Contradiction (Mishnah): One who vows 'until Pesach' - he
is forbidden until Pesach begins;
1. 'Until it will be Pesach' - he is forbidden until
the end of Pesach;
(c) Answer (R. Chanina bar Avdimi): The text of the Mishnah
of vows must be corrected, the opinions of R. Meir and R.
Yosi must be switched.
2. 'Until Penei (the face of) Pesach' - R. Meir says,
he is forbidden until Pesach begins (for before
Pesach faces all of Pesach); R. Yosi says, he is
forbidden until the end of Pesach (perhaps he meant,
any time that faces some part of Pesach, even the
1. Support (Beraisa): The rule is, anything with a
fixed time - if a person said Penei, R. Meir says,
he is forbidden until it ends; R. Yosi says, he is
forbidden until it begins.
(d) (Abaye): The argument in our Mishnah is only when he has
2 sets of daughters - but if he has only 1 set, all agree
that 'big' refers to the oldest, 'small' refers to the
smallest; his middle daughter, he calls by her name.
(e) Question (Rav Ada bar Masnah): If so, in our Mishnah, the
middle daughter of the younger set should be permitted
(when he said 'my big daughter')!
(f) Answer: The case is, there are only 2 daughters in the
1. Support: If there were more, the Mishnah should say
that they are forbidden!
(g) Question (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): But 'Penei
Pesach' - this is analogous to 1 set of daughters, and
the middle days are forbidden!
2. Question: But you must admit, middle daughters in
the older set are forbidden, but the Mishnah does
not teach them!
3. Answer: They did not need to be taught - since we
taught that even the youngest of the older set is
forbidden, surely middle daughters of the older set
are also forbidden!
i. But if middle daughters of the younger set are
forbidden, this should be taught.
(h) Answer (Rava): There, they argue on the language 'Penei'.
1. The opinion that permits the middle days says that
Penei means facing (before); the opinion that
forbids the middle days says that Penei Pesach means
until Mifnei (passes) Pesach.