Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) [line 3] AGREI - his pay, salary
2) [line 3] KUSHTA - the truth
3) [line 5] CHERESHES - a deaf woman

4) [line 5] SHE'HISI'AH AVIHAH (KIDUSHEI KETANAH AL YEDEI AVIHAH)
(a) The Torah gives a father the right to marry off his daughter at any age before she is twelve years old.
(b) If she was divorced or widowed or her father died without marrying her off, the Chachamim gave the girl's mother and/or oldest brother the right to marry her off. In these cases the marriage is only mid'Rabanan and she must be at least ten years old, or at least six years old if she has an understanding of the concept of marriage.
(c) According to the RAMBAM and the RA'AVAD, in the above circumstances, the Chachamim also gave *her* the right to get married by herself. This marriage is also mid'Rabanan. According to the Rambam, she must be at least ten years old, or at least six years old if she has an understanding of the concept of marriage. According to the Ra'avad, however, her Kidushin is valid even if she has enough sense to guard the object given to her for her Kidushin (and she realizes that it was given to her for Kidushin).
(d) In the instances of marriage mid'Rabanan, before she reaches Halachic puberty and becomes a Na'arah (through the growth of two pubic hairs), she has the option of annulling the marriage through a procedure known as Mi'un (refusal). She says before two witnesses, "I do not want him," and the marriage is annulled retroactively. There is no need for her to receive a Get (a bill of divorce). A girl who is married off by her father cannot annul the marriage through Mi'un. (RAMBAM Hilchos Ishus 4:7-8)

5) [line 8] HA'MARISH - a beam
6) [line 8] BIRAH - a large building

7) [line 9] TAKANAS HA'SHAVIM (the Ordinance of the Penitents)
(a) According to Torah law, a person must return the exact item that he stole if it is still in its original state, or its value if it is not, as it states, "v'Heishiv Es ha'Gezeilah Asher Gazal" - "he shall return the stolen object that he stole" (Vayikra 5:23).
(b) If a beam has been built into a building, although it has not been changed from its original state, the Chachamim instituted that the thief need not return the beam itself. He may return its value instead. The reason this was instituted was so that it is not unnecessarily difficult for him to repent and change his ways. This is referred to as "Takanas ha'Shavim" ("the Ordinance of the Penitents").

8) [line 14] KINSI - take in (accept)

9) [line 18] BETULEI BATLEI (GET: BITUL HA'GET)
(a) According to the Torah, a man who sends a Get (bill of divorce) to his wife with a messenger can revoke it before it reaches the hands of his wife by declaring in front of a Beis Din (i.e. two or three men -- Gitin 32b), "The Get that I have sent is hereby nullified." (MISHNAH Gitin 32a). Our Gemara rejects the assumption that calling the Get a Shtar Chov (a note of indebtedness) indicates that the husband has revoked the Get.
(b) The repeal of the Get takes effect even if it is not done in the presence of the woman or the messenger. However, the Chachamim forbade revoking the Get unless it is done in the presence of the messenger or the wife. According to some Amora'im, they feared that if the husband would revoke the Get without the knowledge of the messenger and the wife, his wife may marry another man, relying on the Get, without realizing that the Get was revoked before it was handed to her. In order to prevent this unfortunate situation, the Chachamim decreed that a man may not revoke a Get after sending it to his wife with a messenger unless he (or a second messenger of his) does so in their presence. Other Amora'im maintain that the decree was enacted because men regularly used to cancel Gitin after they dispatched them in order to distress their wives. The Chachamim therefore ruled that the husband (or a second messenger of his) must revoke the Get in the presence of the original messenger or the wife. The husband will not go to such lengths and pursue the original messenger to revoke the Get, just to distress his wife (ibid. 33a and RASHI).
(c) If the husband *does* revoke the Get while not in the presence of the first messenger or the wife (b'Di'eved), the Tana'im argue as to whether his action has any validity (ibid.). The Halachah follows the opinion that the repeal takes effect. However, since with the repeal the husband has transgressed a Rabbinical enactment, he receive Makas Mardus (see Background to Background to Yevamos 52:1) for his action.

10) [line 20] MISHUM KISUFA - because of shame, embarrassment

11) [line 22] KATAN OCHEL NEVEILOS HU - Beis Din is not obligated to prevent (lit. "separate") a child from eating Neveilos
(a) The Torah exempts a Jewish minor (boy under the age of 13, girl under the age of 12) from the performance of Mitzvos.
(b) The Gemara in Yevamos (114a) addresses the question as to whether or not Beis Din is obligated to make sure that minors do not transgress any Torah prohibition, in order that the child not become accustomed to transgressing and continue when he becomes an adult. The Gemara here is following the opinion that Beis Din is not obligated to prevent a child (or a Chereshes who, like a child, has no Da'as and is exempt from the performance of Mitzvos) from sinning.

12) [line 27] MEKA'AKE'A - demolish

13) [line 32] YE'USH KEDI LO KANI (YE'USH, with regard to theft)
(a) Ye'ush means that the owner gives up hope of ever getting back his object from the thief, and verbally acknowledges that the loss is irretrievable ("Vai Li l'Chisaron Kis")
(b) A thief becomes liable for a stolen item (such that if it is destroyed, he must reimburse the owner) when he makes a Ma'aseh Kinyan on the item (a formal Halachically-binding act denoting a change in ownership). Similarly, when he makes a Ma'aseh Kinyan on the item, he acquires it to the extent that if the owner gives up hope ("Ye'ush") of ever getting it back, and the object becomes "changed" (Shinuy; see Background to Sukah 30a) from its original state, he need not return the object itself, but rather its value.
(c) The Gemara here follows the opinion that Ye'ush alone is not enough to grant the thief ownership of the stolen object; Ye'ush must be accompanied by a change in the object itself in order for the thief to acquire ownership of the item.

14) [line 36] ATZEVIN - sad

15) [line 5] D'KALIL HI - that it is entirely consumed on the Mizbe'ach (with the exception of the hide)

16) [line 15] TASHLUMEI CHEFEL (a thief's double restitution)
(a) If a thief surreptitiously steals an object from a fellow Jew, and is found guilty of the theft in court based on the testimony of valid witnesses, he must return the object (if it is still in its original state) or its value (if it is not) to its owner (Vayikra 5:23). In addition, the thief is obligated to pay the victim of the theft the value of the stolen object a second time. Restitution of the value of the stolen object is called "Keren," and the additional payment is known as "Kefel."
(b) Only a thief ("Ganav") who steals surreptitiously pays Kefel, and not a robber ("Gazlan"), who brazenly burglarizes and takes the possessions of others by force. Chazal explain that the Torah punishes a thief more stringently than a robber because of the disrespect he shows for the Creator by taking care to avoid the eyes of man, while not being bothered in the least by the eye of the One Above that is constantly watching (Bava Kama 79b).
(c) A thief does not pay Kefel unless he makes a "Kinyan," an act of acquisition, on the object that he steals (e.g. by lifting it up, bringing it into his own property, drawing it towards himself in a semi-secluded area, etc.). If he simply broke or ruined another person's object without making a Kinyan on it first, he is not considered to be a "Ganav" but a "Mazik" ("one who causes damage"), and he does not pay Kefel.
(d) A thief does not pay Kefel if he steals Shtaros (bills of ownership or promissory notes). Most Tana'im hold that a thief does not pay Kefel if he steals land or slaves (Bava Kama 117b).
(e) Kefel, like any other payment that involves over-compensation for a monetary loss, is considered a "Kenas" (penalty) rather than "Mamon" (compensation). As is true of every Kenas, a thief does not have to pay Kefel if he admits to his theft of his own accord. Only if witnesses testify to his guilt in court must he pay. If he admits to the theft of his own accord, and later witnesses testify to his guilt in court, the Amora'im argue as to whether or not he must pay the Kefel (Bava Kama 74b-75a -- he is exempted from payment, according to the lenient opinion, only if his admission took place under specific circumstances). Until he is obligated to pay the Kefel in court, the thief is fully exempt from paying Kefel, and does not even have a moral obligation to pay it on his own accord (RASHBA Bava Kama 74b, see also RAMBAN in Milchamos at the end of the third Perek of Kesuvos).

17) [line 16] TASHLUMEI ARBA'AH VA'CHAMISHAH (a thief's quadruple and quintuple restitution for the theft of a sheep or ox, respectively)
(a) If a thief surreptitiously steals an object from a fellow Jew, and is found guilty of the theft in court based on the testimony of valid witnesses, he must return the object (if it is still in its original state) or its value (if it is not) to its owner (Vayikra 5:23). In addition, the thief is obligated to pay the victim of the theft the value of the stolen object a second time. Restitution of the value of the stolen object is called "Keren," and the additional payment is known as "Kefel" (See previous entry).
(b) If the object that was stolen was a live sheep or ox, and the thief either slaughtered or sold it, the Torah places an even stiffer fine on the thief. In the case of a stolen sheep that was slaughtered or sold, the thief must compensate the owner a total of four times its actual value ("Arba'ah"), while in the case of a stolen ox that was slaughtered or sold the thief must compensate the owner a total of five times its actual value ("Chamishah"). This law does not apply to any other object or animal that is stolen. Chazal (Bava Kama 79b) explain that the Torah was more lenient with a person who steals a sheep than with one who steals an ox, since he already suffered a somewhat demeaning experience of walking with a sheep on his shoulders (as opposed to the ox-thief, who presumably led the ox on foot before him).
(c) A thief does not pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah for slaughtering a sheep or ox unless he, or a person he appoints, performs a proper ritual slaughter (i.e. a Shechitah of the type that normally permits an animal to be eaten). According to some Amora'im (Bava Kama 68a), a thief does not pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah for *selling* a sheep or ox unless he sold it after "Ye'ush Ba'alim" (i.e. the owner lost all hope of recovering the sheep or ox, see Background to Sukah 30:2), while according to others he only pays Arba'ah va'Chamishah if he sells it *before* Ye'ush Ba'alim.
(d) Arba'ah va'Chamishah, like any other payment that involves over-compensation for a monetary loss, is considered a "Kenas" (penalty) rather than "Mamon" (compensation). As is true of every Kenas, a thief does not have to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah if he admits to his guilt of his own accord. Only if witnesses testify to his guilt in court must he pay. If he admits to his guilt of his own accord, and later witnesses testify to his guilt in court, the Amora'im argue as to whether or not he must pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah (Bava Kama 74b-75a -- he is exempted from payment, according to the lenient opinion, only if his admission took place under specific circumstances). Until he is obligated to pay the Arba'ah va'Chamishah in court, the thief is fully exempt from payment and does not even have a moral obligation to pay it on his own accord (RASHBA Bava Kama 74b, see also RAMBAN in Milchamos at the end of the third Perek of Kesuvos).

18) [line 16] BA'CHUTZ (SHECHUTEI CHUTZ)
The Torah obligates a person to bring all Kodshim that are fit to be offered as sacrifices to the Beis ha'Mikdash, as it states in Vayikra 17:1-7. Besides the Mitzvas Aseh, there is a Lav prohibiting their slaughter outside of the Azarah (Shechutei Chutz). The punishment for transgressing this is Kares (SEFER HA'CHINUCH Mitzvah #186). This punishment applies, however, only to an animal that is fit to be brought inside as a sacrifice. A stolen animal being brought by the thief is not fit to be brought inside the Azarah (according to the view that Ye'ush does not suffice to acquire ownership).

19) [line 18] MAI AVIDTEI - what is it (Kares) doing here?
20) [line 19] ACHICHU ALEI - they laughed at him
21) [line 21] LO SACHUCHU ALEI - do not laugh at him
22) [line 26] L'GIZOSEHA U'VELADOSEHA - for its shearings and offspring
23) [line 28] SHE'LO YEHEI CHOTEI NISKAR - so that a person who sins does not benefit from his action

24) [line 29] SIKRIKON - murderous idolaters who would take the land of Jews instead of killing them. "Sikrikon" comes from the words, "Sa Karka" -- "take land [instead of taking my life]" (RASHI).

25) [line 29] YEHUDAH - the land of Yehudah, consisting of the lands south of the ancient city of Antipatris, near the modern-day Rosh ha'Ayin

26) [line 29] HARUGEI MILCHAMAH - people killed in the war waged by Titus on Yehudah and Yerushalayim (in the time of the destruction of the second Beis ha'Mikdash)

27a) [line 32] MIKCHO BATEL - his sale is nullified
b) [line 33] MIKCHO KAYAM - his sale is upheld
28) [line 38] REVI'A - a quarter of the sum of purchase
29) [line 39] SHE'EIN B'YADAN LIKACH - they (the original owners) do not have [the money] to buy back the land

30) [line 49] AGAV ONSEI - by force, against his will
31) [line 50] "ASHREI ADAM MEFACHED TAMID; U'MAKSHEH LIBO YIPOL B'RA'AH" - "Praiseworthy is the person who is always afraid, and the one who hardens his heart will fall into misfortune." (Mishlei 28:14)

32) [line 51] A'KAMTZA U'VAR KAMTZA CHAROV YERUSHALAYIM - because of [the two people named] Kamtza and Bar Kamtza, Yerushalayim was destroyed

33) [line 52] CHAROV TUR MALKA - [a place called] Tur Malka was destroyed. "Tur Malka," or "Har ha'Melech" (King's Mount) was a mountainous region in the area of Yehudah (some claim that it was in the vicinity of the modern-day Beit Guvrin (less than 50 kilometers southwest of Jerusalem). It was named for the king Yanai, one of the great Chashmona'i kings. It was densely populated, as the Gemara later (57a) describes (see also Eichah Rabah 2:3, and Tanchuma Vayikra 7).

34) [line 52] A'SAKA D'RISPAK - because of the axle of the carriage

35) [line 52] BEITAR / BEN KOZIVA (BAR KOCHVA)
(a) At the time of the Churban Beis ha'Mikdash (70 CE), Yerushalayim was destroyed and razed to the ground. The Roman Tenth Legion was garrisoned there following its destruction. Emperor Hadrian (who reigned from 117 - 138 CE) founded a new pagan city on the site of Yerushalayim, naming it Aelia Capitolina; Aelia in honor of his own name Publius Aelius Hadrianus, and Capitolina in honor of Jupiter, whose temple in Rome was on the Capitolene hill. At the site of the Beis ha'Mikdash, he erected a new temple to Jupiter. According to the Roman historian Dio Cassius, this was the cause of the revolt of Bar Kochva (132 - 135 CE). However, this could have not been the *main* cause of the revolt, since no reference to it is made in the Jewish sources. There are references to a number of commandments whose observance was prohibited by the Romans; e.g. Shabbos, circumcision, family purity and Keri'as Shema. All of these decrees brought on the revolt of Bar Kochva (in about 3883/123 CE), which lasted for nine years.
(b) At first the revolt began by Jews who refused to yield to the decrees. They hid in caves and other secret places. (The Chazan Caves, one of these hideouts, can be visited today.) When discovered and raided by the Romans they would resist with great courage and often with great success. Before long, the attacked became attackers, striking out at the Roman troops. At this time, a leader appeared who was a military genius, Shimon bar Koziva. Rebbi Akiva felt that he was great enough to be Mashiach and called him Bar Kochva, "son of the star," an allusion to the verse, "Darach Kochav mi'Yakov," "A star shall go forth from Yakov" (Bamidbar 24:17). The "star" of the verse is an allusion to the Mashiach.
(c) Bar Kochva succeeded in organizing nets of resistance into an army and gradually pushed the Roman troops out of one position after another. Approximately three years after the beginning of the revolt, Bar Kochva and his troops took over the city of Yerushalayim for approximately three years. There is some evidence that the Beis ha'Mikdash was functioning at this time. The Tenth Legion was evacuated and withdrew to Caesarea. At this point a period of independent Jewish sovereignty began in Eretz Yisrael, which the Gemara refers to as the Kingdom of Bar Koziva, which lasted for two and a half years (Sanhedrin 97b). Jews all over the world, and other nations, too, were giving evidence of great hostility to the Romans.
(d) Sixty years earlier, at the time of the Churban, the Romans required three legions for the conquest of Yerushalayim. At the time of Bar Kochva, the Romans brought in six legions, besides the legions that were already there, and further detachments of cavalry and infantry. [It seems that one of the reasons for this greater need of military strength was that the Jews were unified, in contrast to the times of the Churban when the Jews were fragmented into opposing groups and sects - Editors note.]
(e) Despite the enormous size of their army, the Romans were unwilling to face Bar Kochva's troops in full battle. They proceeded slowly, attacking isolated localities and interfering with food supplies. When the Twenty-second Legion advanced too deeply and too quickly into Jewish territory, it was totally destroyed. It was never reconstituted, and forever after was omitted from the list of units in the Roman army.
(f) After a siege of approximately twelve months, the Romans recaptured the city of Yerushalayim. Bar Kochva and his troops withdrew to Beitar, a large city to the southwest of Yerushalayim, where the fighting continued for some three and a half years. Eventually, Bar Kochva accepted a slanderous accusation against his uncle, the sage Rebbi Elazar ha'Moda'i, who had been praying all along for the salvation of Beitar, and killed him in a fit of rage. Afterwards, Beitar fell to the Romans, and Bar Kochva was slain. (YERUSHALMI Ta'anis 4:5)
(g) The blood of the men, women and children killed is said to have flowed into the Mediterranean Sea, which was a distance of one Mil away (Gitin 57a; according to Eichah Rabah 2:4 four Mil; alt. 40 Mil). The Gemara (ibid.) records that the non-Jews in the neighboring towns did not need to fertilize their vineyards for seven years due to the quantity of blood that flowed into the ground.
(h) At first, the Roman Government did not let the Jews bury the bodies. One emperor is said to have fenced in his vineyard with the dead bodies (Eichah Raba 2:4). After quite some time, the next emperor allowed the bodies to be buried. It was seen as a sign of favor from HaSh-m that the Romans changed their minds, and that the bodies did not decompose before they were buried. The Chachamim established the Berachah of ha'Tov veha'Metiv to commemorate the miracles.
(i) After the revolt was crushed, no Jews were allowed to live in Yerushalayim for 500 years. The rulers killed any Jew who set foot in the city. The fall of the Beis ha'Mikdash sixty-three years earlier triggered the destruction of Yerushalayim; the fall of Beitar triggered the destruction of Eretz Yisrael. Nevertheless, Jews always remained in Eretz Yisrael.
(from History of the Jewish People/From Yavneh to Pumbedisa, Artscroll Publishers, Brooklyn, New York, 1986, by Meir Holder)

36a) [line 53] RACHAMEI - his friend
b) [line 53] BA'AL DEVAVEI - his enemy
37) [line 54] SHAM'EI - his servant, attendant
38) [line 56] MAI BA'IS HACHA - what are you doing here?
39) [line 56] KUM, PUK! - Get up and get out!
40) [last line] HO'IL V'ASAI, SHAVKAN - since I have already come, leave me alone [and let me stay]

Next daf