Previous daf

1)

(a) How is it possible to rule both like Rav (who establishes a Kol [a rumor] only when there are witnesses, and like Rebbi (who establishes it even without them)?

(b) Abaye heard from his wise foster-mother that a Kala de'Lo Pasik means one that lasts at least one and a half days.
What does 'Dumi de'Masa' mean (according to Rashi's Rebbes)?

(c) The Kol must have been constant during that time and must not have stopped.
When does it not matter even if it did stop for a brief stop in the middle?

(d) Which other condition does a Kol require before we will take it seriously?

(a) Why does the Mishnah say in Nedarim that someone may never take take his wife back if he divorces her because of ...

1. ... vows that she took whilst they were married ?
2. ... a bad name that she has acquired for herself?

(b) On what grounds did Rabah bar Rav Huna object to Rabah bar Rav Nachman's comparison of these cases to that of our Mishnah, when a man who is suspected of adultery is forbidden to marry the woman concerned and is obligated to divorce her should he marry her illegally (and that, in these cases too, even if he took her back, he must immediately divorce her)?

(c) How did Rabah bar Rav Nachman justify his comparison?

(d) If that is so, the cases look similar, because in both, Chazal forbade him to marry her, and he did.
Why do we finally conclude that they are not similar at all, and that in the two cases currently under discussion, he *may well be permitted* to remain with his wife if he actually took her back illegally, even though in the case in our Mishnah he is *not*)?

(a) Someone who brings a Get from overseas to Eretz Yisrael is obligated to state 'be'Fanai Nichtav u've'Fanai Nechtam'.
Why is that?

(b) He is not permitted to marry the woman whose Get he brought, after her divorce.
Why is that?

(c) The Tana also prohibits a witness who testifies that a woman's husband died, or that he (either alone or together with others) killed him, from marrying the man's wife.
What does Rebbi Yehudah say?

(a) Our Mishnah forbids the witness who brings the Get from Chutz la'Aretz to marry the woman, from which we can infer that if he brings it from one town in Eretz Yisrael to another, he may.
Why is that?

(b) What is the real reason that Chazal permitted a woman to get married on the basis of the testimony of only one witness who testified that her husband died?

(c) Then why is the man who brings a Get in Eretz Yisrael permitted to marry the woman after the divorce, whereas the witness who testifies that her husband died, is not (seeing as in neither case, do we really rely on the single witnesses' testimony)?

(d) What other Halachic difference between the two stems from the same basic distinction?

(a) According to Rav Yosef, if a man testifies together with a second witness that someone raped him, he is believed to have the man stoned, but not if he claims that he was a willing partner.
Why is that?

(b) We query the suggestion that our Mishnah, which believes the witness who testified that he killed the woman's husband, is different because we are lenient by Eidus Ishah, on the basis of Rav Menasheh's statement.
What did Rav Menasheh say?

(c) According to Rav Yosef, Rav Menasheh will then hold like Rebbi Yehudah, who does not believe the witness who testifies that he killed the woman's husband. We reconcile him with the Rabbanan however, by establishing their opinion in our Mishnah like Rava, who disagrees with Rav Yosef.
What does Rava say?

(d) Then when do we apply the principle 'Hoda'as Ba'al-Din ke'Mei'ah Eidim Dami'.

6)

(a) Does it follow that Rav Yosef, who maintains that a person who claims that someone had relations with him with his consent, disqualifies himself, holds like Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah?

(b) How does Rav Yosef then explain Rav Menasheh?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah's distinction between 'Haragti' and 'Haragnuhu' is senseless.
What does he mean by 'Haragnuhu' (see also Tosfos DH 'be'Omer')?

(b) In the Beraisa that supports this explanation, what did Rebbi Yehudah retort to the Rabbanan, when they quoted him the story of the robber who, as he was being taken out to be killed, testified that he had killed the wife of Shimon ben Kohen, concluding that the Rabbanan of that time believed him?

(c) If, as Rebbi Yehudah maintained, he had only participated in the robbing, but not in the murder, then why did he receive the death-penalty?

(a) A Chacham who was unable to find justification for nullifying a woman's vow, as a result of which her husband divorced her, is forbidden to marry her.
Why then, is a Dayan in whose presence a girl made Miy'un or Chalitzah, subsequently permitted to marry her?

(b) We infer from our Mishnah, that had the same Chacham managed to nullify the woman's vow, he would have been permitted to marry her in the event of her husband subsequently dying or divorcing her. This cannot be referring to one of three Dayanim, who are permitted to do so in any case, but to a single Dayan.
Since when can one Dayan nullify vows?

(a) The Tana of our Mishnah permits a Dayan in whose presence a girl made Miy'un or Chalitzah to marry her, because a Beis-Din of three is beyond suspicion.
Can we infer that *two* witnesses are suspected of lying?

(b) Then why did the Tana specifically write a Beis-Din of *three*?

(a) If a Chacham or a witness who brought a Get from overseas *did* marry the woman concerned, Rav Kahana rules that he must divorce her immediately. What does Rav Ashi say?

(b) The Beraisa backs Rav Ashi's ruling. Rav Ashi also cites a Mishnah concerning someone about whom a rumor has spread that he had relations with a Shifchah or a Nochris.
What does the Mishnah say?

(c) Then why must someone who married a divorced woman under similar circumstances divorce her immediately?

Next daf