Previous daf

1)

(a) Is a woman Mekudeshes if a man said to her ...

1. ... 'Harei At Ishti;' 'Harei At Arusasi'; 'Harei At Kenuyah Li'?
2. ... 'Harei At she'Li'; 'Harei At bi'Reshusi'; 'Harei At Zekukah Li'?

(b) Why does the Tana of the Beraisa then list them as two separate lists? Why does he not insert all six cases in one list?

(c) What do the following have in common 'Meyuchedes Li'; 'Meyu'edes Li'; 'Ezrasi'; 'Negdasi' ... 'Lekuchasi'?

(d) What is the source for the She'eilah concerning the Lashon ...

1. ... 'Meyuchedes Li'?
2. ... 'Meyu'edes Li'? Why might they be a Lashon of Kidushin?
3. ... 'Ezrasi'; 'Negdasi'?

(a) We also ask about the Lashon 'Atzurasi'.
What might this be a Lashon of Kidushin?

(b) What would be wrong with connecting 'Atzurasi' with the Pasuk in Shmuel "Ki Ishah Atzurah Lanu"?

(c) Which is the only one of all the above-mentioned cases that is actually resolved?

(a) On what grounds do we query the Beraisa 'ha'Omer Charufasi Mekudeshes, she'Kein bi'Yehudah Korin la'Arusah Charufah'?

(b) Why is with the amendment, which leaves this statement intact, but first quotes the Pasuk in Kedoshim "ve'Hi Shifchah Necherefes le'Ish" as the source, unacceptable?

(c) How does the Beraisa finally read?

(d) How is it that earlier, we quoted a Pasuk in support of 'Charufasi', and finally we ignore it?

(a) Rebbi Yossi says in a Beraisa that if a couple were discussing divorce or Kidushin, and the man then gave the woman a Get or Kidushin, no words are necessary.
What does Rebbi Yehudah say?

(b) Like whom does Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel rule? What problem does this create with regard to all the Leshonos of Kidushin that we queried earlier?

(c) Would there be any room for doubt (about the woman's being Mekudeshes) if they had not previously discussed Kidushin?

(d) How do we resolve the previous problem? In which case do we establish all the queries?

(a) How do Shmuel and Rebbi Oshaya qualify Rebbi Yossi's opinion? What do they mean when they say 've'Hu she'Asukin be'Oso Inyan'?

(b) In fact, this is a Machlokes Tana'im, and follows the opinion of Rebbi. What does Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon say?

(c) Why can that be? How is the woman expected to know that he is actually giving her Kidushin or a Get, if he did not say so?

(a) What did Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel say about someone who is not conversant with the Dinim of Gitin and Kidushin?

(b) Would someone who does not know of Rav Huna Amar Shmuel's ruling 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Yossi' fall under this category?

7)

(a) Why is a Get not valid if he wrote on it 'Harei At ...

1. ... bas Chorin' and gave it to his wife?
2. ... Muteres le'Chol Adam' and gave it to his Shifchah?

(b) Ravina asked Rav Ashi whether 'Harei At le'Atzmech' is a valid Lashon for Gitin.
What other connotations does it have?

(c) Rav Ashi replied with a Beraisa regarding a Get Shichrur.
What does the Beraisa say?

(d) How does he extrapolate the resolution to Ravina's She'eilah from there?

(a) According to the Tana of a Beraisa, if someone sells his Eved to a Nochri, the Eved goes free, but he requires a Get Shichrur.
How does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel qualify this?

(b) How does Rav Sheishes define 'Ono'?

(c) What does Rav Chanin ([see Rashash], or Rav Chanin me'Chuza'ah) prove from here?

(a) Abaye says 'ha'Mekadesh be'Milveh, Einah Mekudeshes; be'Hana'as Milveh, Mekudeshes'.
Why is ...

1. ... she not Mekudeshes in the Reisha?
2. ... it forbidden to do so in the Seifa?

(b) We raise two objections to the suggestion that Hana'as Milveh means that he lent her four Zuzim in exchange for five. One, that there would then be no difference between this case and that of Milveh (seeing as he has not given her anything).
What is the other?

(c) So how do we finally define Hana'as Milveh? Why is it not real Ribis?

(d) Which case is even more straightforward than the one we just mentioned?

(a) According to the initial version of Rava's statement, if someone says 'Heylech Manah al-M'nas she'Tachzireihu Li' with regard to a sale or with regard to Kidushin, the sale or the Kidushin is invalid.
Why is that?

(b) Which third case belongs to this group?

(c) If he says this when giving Terumah to a Kohen, he has fulfilled the Mitzvah.
Why should he nevertheless avoid doing so?

(d) How does this case resemble that decree?

(a) What intrinsic problem do we have with Rava's statement?

(b) In addition, another statement of Rava clashes with the previous one. What did Rava say in a case of 'Heylech Esrog Zeh al-M'nas she'Tachzireihu Li'? What do we extrapolate from there?

(c) Why will he not have fulfilled the Mitzvah, in the event that he did not return it?

(d) Rav Ashi therefore concludes that in all the above cases, the Kinyan is valid, except for one.
Which one?

Next daf