Previous daf

1)

(a) Beis Shamai extrapolates from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Ki Matza Bah *Ervas* Davar" - that a man may only divorce his wife if he she is guilty of having committed adultery, and not for any other reason.

(b) Beis Hillel extrapolate from "Davar" in the same Pasuk - that he may divorce her for any other fault that he finds in her (even if she just burned the food).

(c) Rebbi Akiva is the most lenient of all. He learns that a man may divorce his wife simply because he found someone nicer than her - from the Pasuk there "ve'Hayah Im Lo Simtza Chein be'Einav ... ".

(a) According to ...

1. ... Beis Hillel, the Torah needs to add "Ervas" - to teach us that even if she committed adultery, she will be permitted to marry someone else once her husband has divorced her (since that is what the Pasuk is talking about there).
2. ... Beis Shamai, the Torah writes "Davar" to Darshen a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Davar" "Davar" from Eidus, from which we learn that here, like by Eidus, two witnesses are required.

(b) Despite the fact that that Beis Hillel agrees with the G'ezeirah-Shavah', they nevertheless learn from there the D'rashah in our Mishnah - from the fact that the Torah, by not writing "Ervah be'Davar" lends itself to a second D'rashah.

(c) Beis Shamai counter Beis Hillel's argument - by pointing out that, had the Torah wanted to teach us the option of divorcing one's wife for burning the food, it would have written "O Ervas O Davar".

(d) Beis Hillel reply - that the Torah writes "Ervas Davar" because it implies either of the two, just like "O Ervah O Davar" would.

(a) Resh Lakish gives four meanings to the word "Ki": 'I' - if or when, 'Dilma' - perhaps (with the connotation of 'Pen' [lest], 'Ela' - but, and 'Deha' - because.

(b) "Ki" mean in the Pasuk "Ki Somar bi'Levav'cha Rabim ha'Goyim ha'Eileh ... Lo Siyrah Meihem" means - 'perhaps'.

(c) Based on Resh Lakish, Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel (see Tosfos DH 'Beis Shamai') argue with Rebbi Akiva over the interpretation of the word "Ki" in the Pasuk "ve'Hayah Im Lo Simtza Chein be'Einav ... Ki Matza Bah Ervas Davar". According to ...

1. ... Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel, "Ki Matza Bah Ervas Davar" is translated as 'because he found in her Ervas Davar' (qualifying the earlier phrase).
2. ... Rebbi Akiva - it is translated as 'when he found ... ' (making it an alternative reason for devorcing her).

(a) Rav Papa asked Abaye what the Din would be if he found neither 'Ervas nor 'Davar'. What he meant to ask was - whether, according to Beis Hillel, if he divorced his wife because he disliked her, he would be obligated to take her back.

(b) Rava answered from the Pasuk "Lo Yuchal Shalchah *Kol Yamav*" which comes to teach us - that someone who raped a girl and married her (in accordace with the Halachah), but subsequently divorced her, he must take her back.

(c) Rava extraplolated the answer to Rav Papa's She'eilah from there - because if all men who divorce their wives are not obligated to do so, this Pasuk would be redundant.

(a) Rav Mesharshaya asked Rava whether - there is anything wrong with a having in mind to divorce his wife, whilst she continues to serve him faithfully.

(b) Rava replied - with a Pasuk in Mishlei which forbids it.

(c) Rebbi Meir cites three levels of fussiness does Rebbi Meir cite regarding people into whose food a fly falls - the first, who pours out the entire bowl of soup; the second (the reaction of most people), who throws out the soup; the third, who sucks the soup from the fly before eating it.

(d) He compares them to three levels of people with regard to the way they react towards their wives. He compares ...

1. ... the first level (the man who pours out the entire bowl) - to a man who locks his wife in the house whenever he leaves it (to ensure that she does not speak with any man at all).
2. ... the second level (the way most people react) - to a man who allows her to speak to speak with her brothers and with other relatives, but not with other people.
3. ... the third level (of the man who sucks out the fly and eats it) - to one who sees her behaving in immodestly, but does nothing about it.

(a) Papus ben Yehudah (husband of Miriam the women's hairdresser - otherwise known as Mary Magdelene) used to lock his wife in the house whenever he left it.

(b) This is not a Midah that one ought to emulate - because it causes one's wife to rebel.

(a) In the last of the four levels, Rebbi Meir lists three things that the man sees his wife doing: She goes into the street with her head uncovered, she exposes her arms whilst spinning in the street - and she bathes in the same location where the men bathe, in a manner that enanbles them to see her going into the water.

(b) We need to amend the original text 've'Rochtzos im B'nei Adam' - because that would be such a serious breach of morality that it would brand her as a prostitute, forbidding her on her husband (see Tosfos DH 'Im B'nei Adam').

(c) Rebbi Meir says - that it is a Mitzvah to divorce a woman who does these things.

(d) The Torah describes a man who marries a woman whom her husband divorced because of such reasons "Ish Acher" - because he is different than his predecessor, inasmuch as the former, divorced this evil woman, and he married her.

8)

(a) Based on the sequence of the Pasuk "u'S'nei'ah ha'Ish ha'Acharon ... O Ki Yamus ha'Ish ha'Acharon', Rebbi Meir comments - that, if he is lucky, he too, will divorce her; if not, she will cause his death.

(b) Rebbi Yehudah explains the Pasuk "Ki Sanei Sh'lach" to mean - that when a man hates his wife, he should go ahead and divorce her (like Rebbi Akiva).

(c) Rebbi Yochanan interprets this Pasuk" - to mean that if she is hated by Hashem (because she committed adultery) then he should divorce her (like Beis Shamai). Note: Rebbi Yehudah was a Tana, and Rebbi Yochanan, an Amora, and the disputants do not match.

(d) According to other texts, he explains the Pasuk like Beis Hillel. What the Pasuk then means is - if he sends her away, he is hated by Hashem.

(a) We conclude that in fact, Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Yochanan do not argue, because Rebbi Yehudah is speaking about divorcing one's second wife (in which case all the Tana'im agree that one is permitted to divorce one's wife even without a solid reason to do so). Whereas Rebbi Yochanan, who declines to explain like Yehudah, is speaking about divorcing his first wife (over whom they argue). Rebbi Elazar says that someone who divorces his first wife (without a sound reason) - causes the Mizbe'ach to weep.

(b) The Navi Malachi describes someone who does so as - having betrayed the wife of his youth, his companion and the one with whom he entered into a covenant.

On to Kidushin