REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Shevuos 30
***** Perek Shevu'as ha'Edus *****
(a) What does our Mishnah say about women, relatives and Pesulei Eidus?
What do all of these have in common, with regard to Shevu'as ha'Eidus?
(b) What is the source for this Halachah?
(c) Under what circumstances does Rebbi Meir include Shevu'as ha'Eidus even
(d) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra (in connection with Shevu'as
ha'Eidus) "Im Lo Yagid ... "?
(a) What do the Chachamim say with regard to Shevu'as ha'Eidus outside
(b) What does the Tana mean when he says 've'Chayavin al Zadon ha'Shevu'ah
ve'al Shigegasah Im Zadon ha'Eidus'? What is the Nishba Chayav?
(c) Why is he then Chayav even though he was Meizid on the Eidus?
(d) Why does the Tana then exempt him in a case where he was a Shogeg on the
Eidus as well?
(a) What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim "Ve'amdu Sh'nei
ha'Anashim Asher Lifnei Lahem ha'Riv ... "?
(b) How does the Tana know that the Pasuk is referring to the witnesses, and
not to the litigants?
(c) According to this Beraisa, why would we otherwise have thought that the
Pasuk is referring to the litigants?
(a) In a second Beraisa, the Tana originally establishes the Pasuk by the
witnesses based on the fact that the Torah adds the word "Sh'nei'', because
if it referred to the litigants, who says that there were only two
litigants, and not three?
How do we then justify the need for the
'Gezeirah-Shavah' to preclude the litigants? How might we have interpreted
(b) And in a third Beraisa, the Tana originally establishes the Pasuk by the
witnesses from the fact that the Torah adds the word "ha'Anashim", because
if it referred to the litigants, who says that one of them at least, was not
How do we then justify the need for the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' to
preclude the litigants? How might we have explained the Torah's use of the
(c) What is the source for this theory?
(a) What does the Tana Kama of the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk "Ve'amdu
Sh'nei ha'Anashim ... "?
(b) How does the Tana know that the Pasuk is referring to the litigants as
well as to the witnesses?
(c) What does Rebbi Yehudah say? What does he add to the above ruling?
(d) What is his reason for this ruling?
(a) The Beraisa learns Rebbi Yehudah's statement from the Pasuk "be'Tzedek
What does a second Beraisa learn from there?
(b) And how does a Beraisa quoted by Rav Yosef Darshen the word "Amisecha"?
What is it the acronym of?
(a) When Rav Ula B'rei de'Rav Ila'i came before Rav Nachman for a Din Torah,
what message did Rav Yosef send to Rav Nachman?
Answers to questions
(b) Why was Rav Nachman initially startled?
(c) Besides in the way that we just explained ('Am she'Itcha be'Torah
u've'Mitzvos'), how else did Rav Nachman resolve the problem? What is a case
of 'Shuda de'Dayni'?
(a) The Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabbanan, says Ula, is
confined to the litigants.
What will both Tana'im hold however, with
regard to the witnesses?
(b) What does Rav Huna (or Rava) learn from the Pasuk "Va'yeishev Moshe
Lishpot es ha'Am, Va'ya'amod ha'Am"?
(c) What alternative source does Rav Huna cite for his ruling?
(a) What quandary faced Rav Nachman, when Rav Huna's wife appeared before
him for a Din Torah?
(b) Why did Rav Huna not appear in Beis-Din so that his wife could remain at
home, as we learned above?
(c) How did he solve the problem? What did he instruct his Shamash to do?
(d) How do we reconcile this with what we learned earlier that at the time
of the G'mar Din, the Dayanim are obligated to sit (see Toras Chayim), and
the litigants to stand? So how could he remain standing during the
(a) What does Rabah bar Rav Huna say about a Talmid-Chacham and an Am
ha'Aretz who appear in Beis-Din together for a Din Torah?
(b) When Rav Sh'ravyah appeared before Rav Papa for a Din Torah with an Am
ha'Aretz, Rav Papa carried out the previous Halachah.
What did he do when
the Sheli'ach Beis-Din caused the second litigant to stand up by giving him
(c) Why was Rav Papa not afraid that the litigant might become tongue-tied?
(a) On what grounds does Rabah bar Rav Huna forbid the Talmid-Chacham, in
the previous case, to sit down before the Am ha'Aretz has arrived in
(b) In which case will this be permitted?
(a) In which case does Rabah bar Rav Huna permit a Talmid-Chacham to decline
to appear in Beis-Din to testify for one of the litigants?
(b) Which Mishnah in Bava Metzi'a does Rav Shisha B'rei de'Rav Idi cite in
support of Rabah bar Rav Huna?
(c) In which case will this concession not apply?
(d) On which principle is this stringency based?
(a) What is the source for the Mitzvah to show a Talmid-Chacham respect?
(b) When Rav Yeimar came to Beis-Din to testify on behalf of Mar Zutra, what
did Ameimar do that caused Rav Ashi to raise an eyebrow?
(c) How did Ameimar vindicate his ruling?
(a) What does the Beraisa mean when it rules that a Dayan should not make
'Sanigron' to corroborate his words?
Answers to questions
(b) What is the source for this ruling?
(c) And why may a Dayan not place a Bur (an ignoramus) before him to discuss
his learning with him?
(d) What dual Halachah does the Tana cite with regard to a Dayan and a
witness? With whom should neither join, even in their quest for the truth?