Previous daf

1)

(a) We just established that neither Rebbi Meir ('Hiskadshi Li bi'Sh'tar Chov ... Mekudeshes') nor the Rabbanan ('Einah Mekudeshes') hold like Rebbi ('Osiyos Niknos bi'Mesirah'), that they both hold like Rav Papa ('Tzarich Lemichtav K'ni Lach Hu ve'Chol Shibudei'), and that they argue over Shmuel's Din ('ha'Mocher Sht'ar Chov la'Chaveiro, ve'Chazar u'Machlo, Machul'). Might it be possible for Rebbi Meir to hold like Shmuel, and still to rule 'Mekudeshes'?

(b) Their Machlokes by Milveh al Peh concerns Rav Huna Amar Rav.
What does Rav Huna say re. 'Ma'amad Sheloshtan'?

(c) What is then the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim?

(a) 'Hiskadshi Li bi'Shtar, Rebbi Meir Omer Einah Mekudeshes, ve'Rebbi Elazar Omer Mekudeshes'.
What do the Chachamim say?

(b) Does it make any difference whether the paper is worth a Perutah or not, according to ...

1. ... Rebbi Meir?
2. ... Rebbi Elazar?

(c) Why could the Tana of the Beraisa not be speaking about a Sh'tar Chov of others? What problem would that create with Rebbi Meir?

(d) So how do we initially try to establish the Beraisa? What do we try and prove with that?

(a) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak therefore establishes the Beraisa by a Sh'tar Kidushin without witnesses.
What is then the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Elazar?

(b) What does 'Karsi' mean?

(c) And what is the reasoning behind the Chachamim's ruling?

(d) What will they hold if the paper is not worth a Perutah?

(a) Alternatively, they argue over Resh Lakish's She'eilah re. a Sh'tar Kidushin that was written she'Lo Lishmah.
What are the two sides of the She'eilah? Why might it be ...

1. ... Pasul?
2. ... Kasher?

(b) How did Resh Lakish himself resolve the She'eilah?

(c) Alternatively, they both hold like Resh Lakish.
What then is the basis of their Machlokes?

(d) This too, is a Machlokes Amora'im.
What is the reason ...

1. ... of Rava and Ravina who validate such a Sh'tar Kidushin?
2. ... of Rav Papa and Rav Sh'ravya who declare it void?

(a) If a woman asks a man to betroth her with the Shirin, Nezamin ve'Taba'os that he makes her, Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa validates the Kidushin as soon as they are completed.
What are ...

1. ... Shirin?
2. ... Nezamin?
3. ... Taba'os?

(b) What do the Chachamim say?

(c) When the Chachamim say 'Ad she'Yagi'a Mamon le'Yadah', why can they not be referring to the finished product?

(a) Assuming that they mean other money, how do we try to establish the Machlokes?

(b) What is the loan in this case?

(c) What are we trying to prove with this?

(d) How do we initially establish both opinions like Rav? How else might we explain Rebbi Meir, who says Mekudeshes?

7)

(a) We just established the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Chachamim by whether the Sechirus only falls due at the end, or whether the hirer becomes obligated Perutah by Perutah. We subsequently suggest that both Tana'im might even hold ...

1. ... the latter possiblity and ha'Mekadesh be'Milveh Einah Mekudeshes.
   What then, is the basis of their Machlokes? What sort of craftsman are they arguing about?
2. ... that the craftsman does not acquire the vessel that he has made.
   What is then the basis of their Machlokes?

(b) The Tana Kama of another Beraisa differentiates between a man who betroths a woman 'bi'S'char she'Asisi Imach' and 'bi'S'char she'E'eseh Imach'.
Why does he say ...

1. ... 'bi'S'char she'Asisi Imach, Einah Mekudeshes'?
2. ... 'bi'S'char she'E'eseh Imach, Mekudeshes'?

(c) Why does Rebbi Nasan then say that even in the latter case, she is not Mekudeshes?

(d) After agreeing with the statement of Rebbi Nasan, Rebbi adds 've'Im sHosif Lah Nofach mi'Shelo, Mekudeshes'.
What does Rebbi Nasan hold?

(a) According to the Tana of our Mishnah, what will be the Din if a man promises to betroth a woman with wine, with a golden Dinar or on condition that he is rich, and it turns out to be honey, silver or that he is poor, or vice-versa?

(b) What does Rebbi Shimon say? Which case in the Mishnah is he referring to?

(a) If a man says 'Hiskadshi Li be'Kos Zeh', one Beraisa rules 'Bo u'Vameh she'Besocho'.
What does he mean by that?

(b) A second Beraisa says 'Bo ve'Lo Bameh she'Besocho'.
What does a third Beraisa say?

(c) How do we reconcile the three Tana'im? In which case do we say ...

1. ... 'Bo u'Vameh she'Besocho'?
2. ... 'Bo ve'Lo Bameh she'Besocho'?
3. ... 'Bameh she'Besocho ve'Lo Bo'?

(a) What does the Beraisa rule re. a man who paid money for vinegar and it turns out to be wine?

(b) Why does this pose a problem on Rebbi Shimon in our Mishnah?

(a) Abaye tries to resolve this problem. He explained to his son that the Machlokes between the Tana Kama and Rebbi Shimon concerns a Sheli'ach. What is the case? What is then the basis of their Machlokes?

(b) What is the problem with Abaye's explanation from the word ...

1. ... 'Hiskadshi *Li*'?
2. ... '*Hit'ah* li'Sh'vach'?

(c) What third Kashya do we ask from 'be'Dinar Zeh shel Kesef ve'Nimtza shel Zahav'?

(d) Rava resolves the problem together with Rebbi Chiya bar Avin.
What title did he confer upon the latter?

(a) In fact, Rava's answer agrees in principle with that of Abaye.
What is the difference between the two answers?

(b) How does Rava then explain the statement 've'Nimtza shel Zahav'?

Next daf