Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

11) WHEN ARE RELATIONS INTENDED TO MAKE ENGAGEMENT?

(a) Question: This is as a case of an error by 1 woman, and Tana'im argue!
(b) Answer: Here also, they argue as follows. The 1st Tana holds, a man knows that engagement of a minor is not mi'Dioraisa; when he had relations, he intended that they should make engagement.
(c) R. Eliezer holds, a man thinks that engagement of a minor is mi'Dioraisa; when he had relations, he assumed he was already engaged, and did not intend that relations should make engagement.
(d) (Rav Acha Bar Yakov): One who makes engagement on condition and has relations, all agree that a Get is not required.
(e) Question (Rav Acha Brei d'Rav Ika - Beraisa): A mistaken Chalitzah is valid.

1. Question: What is a mistaken Chalitzah?
2. Answer #1 (Reish Lakish): They tell the Yavam, do Chalitzah, and you will be permitted to do Yibum.

i. Objection (R. Yochanan - Beraisa): Whether he intended for Chalitzah but she didn't, or she intended but he didn't, the Chalitzah is invalid, unless both have intention.

3. Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): They tell the Yavam, do Chalitzah on condition that she will give you 200 Zuz.

(f) Summation of question: We see, since he does the act of Chalitzah, he pardons the condition - here also, since he has relations, he pardons his condition!
(g) Answer (Rav Acha Bar Yakov): Do you think this is a good question?!

1. All conditions are learned from the tribes of Gad and Reuven (that were given Ever ha'Yarden on condition that they help conquer Eretz Yisrael).
2. If the action (subject to condition) can be fulfilled by a messenger, the condition is binding; if not, the condition is void.

(h) Question: But relations cannot be performed by a messenger, and one can put a condition on engagement through relations!
(i) Answer: That is because a verse teaches that all acts of engagement have the same law.

(a) (Ula): One that makes engagement with a loan and had relations, or engaged on condition and had relations, or engaged with less than a Prutah and had relations - all agree, she needs a Get.
(b) (Rav Yosef Bar Aba): One that makes engagement with less than a Prutah and had relations - all agree, she needs a Get.

1. In this case, a person does not err (and intends for engagement, since he knows that the 1st engagement was invalid), but in the other cases of Ula, a person errs, and a Get is not needed.

(c) (Rav Kahana): A man that engages on condition, and has relations - she needs a Get;

1. There was a case, and Chachamim could not permit her without a Get.

(d) This is unlike the following Tana.

1. (R. Yishmael): "She (an adulterer) was not grabbed" - she is forbidden; there is another case, even though she was not grabbed, she is permitted - this is one whose engagement was erroneous, even though she has a son on her shoulder, she may leave her husband without a Get.

13) IF THE VOW WAS UNDONE

(a) (Beraisa): (A woman was engaged on condition that she has no vows or blemishes. If she had a vow, and) went to a Chacham and he permitted her vow, she is engaged; (If she had a blemish and) went to a doctor and he removed the blemish, she is not engaged.
(b) Question: What is the difference?
(c) Answer: A Chacham uproots the vow retroactively; a doctor's cure is not retroactive.
(d) Contradiction (Beraisa): If she went to a Chacham and he permitted her vow, or to a doctor and he removed the blemish, she is not engaged.
(e) Answer #1 (Rabah): The 1st Beraisa is as R. Meir, the latter, as R. Elazar.

1. R. Meir says, a man does not mind if his wife is shamed by having to go to Beis Din; R. Elazar says, a man does not want his wife to be shamed by going to Beis Din.
2. Question: How do we know that they say this?
3. Answer (Mishnah): A man that divorces his wife because of a vow she made, or because of her bad reputation, may not remarry her;
4. R. Yehudah says, if many knew about the vow, he may not remarry her; if not, he may remarry her;
5. R. Meir says, if the vow can only be annulled by a Chacham (i.e. the husband cannot annul it), he may not remarry her; if the husband can annul it, he may remarry her;
6. R. Elazar says, we only prohibited him from remarrying her in the case when a Chacham is needed on account of the case when a Chacham is not needed.
7. Question: What is the reason of R. Yehudah (that a vow made in public cannot be annulled)?