Previous daf

1)

(a) The Anshei Galil used to write in their Kesuvos 'At Tehei Yasvas be'Veisi u'Miszana mi'Nechasai Kol Yemei Meigar Armelusech'.
What did the Anshei Yehudah used to write in place of 'Kol Yemei Meigar Armelusach'?

(b) What are the implications of the Anshei Yehudah's text?

(a) How will this help explain the She'eilah whether the correct text in our Mishnah is 'Almanah Nizones min ha'Achin', or 'Almanah ha'Nizones min ha'Achin'.
How do the two texts fit the two customs?

(b) We try to resolve the She'eilah from a statement of Rebbi Zeira Amar Shmuel.
What does Rebbi Zeira Amar Shmuel say regarding the findings of a widow?

(c) What initially causes us to think that Shmuel's statement fits better with the text 'Almanah ha'Nizones ... '?

(d) We conclude however, that Shmuel might well have had the text 'Almanah Nizones ... '.
Why, in spite of that, would the findings of an Almanah go to herself and not to the orphans?

(a) Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina says that any Melachah that a woman was obligated to do for her husband, she is obligated to do for his heirs, except for three.
What are the three exceptions?

(b) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi says that any Melachah that a slave is obligated to do for his master, a Talmid is obligated to do for his Rebbe except for one (which he forbids his to do).
Which one?

(c) Rava permits even that one in a place where the Talmid is known.
Which further concession does Rav Ashi add?

(d) Is a slave forbidden to wear Tefilin?

(a) What does Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan learn from the Pasuk in Iyov "la'Mas me'Re'eihu Chesed"?

(b) What does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak add to this, based on the phrase that follows it "ve'Yir'as Shakai Ya'azov"?

(a) What does Rebbi Elazar say about an Almanah, whose claim for Mezonos is confined to Karka, but who seized Metaltelin?

(b) Rebbi Elazar's ruling is substantiated by a Beraisa and by Rav Dimi. What did Rav Dimi testify about the daughter-in-law of Rebbi Shabsi?

(c) According to Ravina, this concession does not extend to a woman who claimed her Kesuvah from Metaltelin.
On what grounds did Mar bar Rav Ashi object to Ravina's ruling?

(d) The Halachah is generally like Mar bar Rav Ashi.
Whose opinion did Rav Yitzchak bar Naftali Amar Rava corroborate?

(a) What did Rebbi Yochanan Amar Rebbi Yossi ben Zimra say about an Almanah who waited two or three years before claiming her Mezonos from her husband's heirs?

(b) Having said that she loses it after two years, he nevertheless mentions three, because there might be a difference between a wealthy woman and a poor one.
What is meant by that?

(c) What is the alternative distinction that we make between two and three years?

(d) Does this mean that a widow who fails to claim for two or three years, has lost her right to claim any more?

7)

(a) Rebbi Yochanan asked what the Din will be if the Yesomim claims that they paid the Almanah's Mezonos, and she counters that she did not receive it; whether the property is in the Yesomim's possession or in the possession of the Almanah.
Assuming the former side of the She'eilah to be correct, what would the Almanah have to do to prove her claim?

(b) On what grounds might the property be considered to be in the possession of the Almanah?

(c) We resolve the She'eilah from a Beraisa quoted by Levi.
What distinction does the Tana make there between the period before the Almanah remarries and afterwards?

(a) Based on another Beraisa, Rav Shimi bar Ashi suggests that this is in fact a Machlokes Tana'im. Rebbi Yehudah requires an Almanah who sells some of her deceased husband's property, to record all the details of her sales in writing: 'These I sold for Mezonos and these for my Kesuvah'.
What does Rebbi Yossi say?

(b) How does Rav Shimi bar Ashi try and connect this Beraisa with our She'eilah (whether the property is in the possession of the Yesomim or the Almanah)? Which opinion holds which side?

(c) According to Rebbi Yehudah, what would happen if she failed to write details of her sale? What will the Yesomim counter when she comes to claim her Kesuvah and her Mezonos?

(d) According to Rebbi Yossi, how will not writing down the details be to her advantage? What will she now be able to claim?

(a) We reject this proof however, on the grounds that even Rebbi Yehudah might agree that the property is in the possession of the Almanah.
In that case, why does he require her to record in writing all the details of what she sold?

(b) How do we support this explanation from the Mishnah later in this Perek, which writes 'Mocheres li'Mezonos she'Lo be'Veis-Din, ve'Koseves, Eilu li'Mezonos Macharti'?

(c) Why is this proof stronger than the one from Rebbi Yehudah in the Beraisa?

(a) Alternatively, even Rebbi Yossi might hold that the property is in the possession of the Yesomim, only he holds like Abaye Keshisha.
What did Abaye Keshisha say about a man on his death-bed who orders his heirs to give two hundred Zuz to so-and-so his creditor?

(b) What would the creditor gain by taking the money as a gift?

(c) How will this tie up with our case? What will the Almanah gain by not recording all the details of her sales in writing?

(d) If Rebbi Yossi really holds that the property is in the possession of the Yesomim, why can they not simply counter that she sold it for her Kesuvah (in which case, she will lose her Mezonos)?

Next daf