KIDUSHIN 15 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for thIs Daf for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.

1)

(a)What does the Tana Kama of the Beraisa learn from the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk "Ha'anek Ta'anik Lo)"?

(b)On what grounds do we reject the suggestion that Rebbi Elazar learns from there "Lo" 've'Lo l'Yorshav'?

(c)We conclude that his Derashah from there is based on Rebbi Nasan's opinion. What does Rebbi Nasan say, regarding a case where Reuven owes Shimon money and Shimon owes Levi?

(d)What does Rebbi Elazar now learn from "Ha'anek Ta'anik Lo"?

1)

(a)In the Pasuk "Ha'anek Ta'anik Lo", the Tana Kama of the Beraisa learns from the word "Lo" "Lo", 've'Lo l'Mocher Atzmo' (that the Din of Ha'anakah does not pertain to an Eved who sold himself).

(b)We reject the suggestion that Rebbi Elazar learns from there "Lo" 've'Lo l'Yorshav' because, seeing as the Torah refers to the Eved Ivri as 'Sachir', it would be illogical to say that his heirs should not inherit it should he die.

(c)We conclude that his Derashah from there is based on Rebbi Nasan, who says that if Reuven owes Shimon money and Shimon owes Levi, we make Reuven pay Levi directly (known as 'Shibuda d'Rebbi Nasan').

(d)Rebbi Elazar now learns from "Ha'anek Ta'anik Lo" "Lo", 've'Lo l'Ba'al Chovo' (teaching us that in this case, Rebbi Nasan's Din does not apply), and that the master is obligated to give the Ha'anakah to the Eved Ivri, and not to his creditors.

2)

(a)On what grounds do the Rabanan disagree with Rebbi Elazar in this case?

(b)What induces Rebbi Yitzchak in a Beraisa to explain "Ki Mishneh S'char Sachir Avadcha" to mean that the Eved Ivri's master gives him a Shifchah Kena'anis? Why can the Pasuk not be taken literally?

2)

(a)The Rabanan disagree with Rebbi Elazar in this case because they do not hold like Rebbi Nasan.

(b)What induces Rebbi Yitzchak in a Beraisa to explain "Ki Mishneh S'char Sachir Avadcha" to mean that the Eved Ivri's master gives him a Shifchah Kena'anis is the Pasuk "Ki Tov Lo Imach", from which we Darshen 'Imach b'Ma'achal, Imach b'Mishteh' (which clashes with the literal meaning of the current Pasuk).

3)

(a)What do the Rabanan learn from the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk in Mishpatim "Im Adonav Yiten Lo Ishah")?

(b)What does Rebbi Elazar learn from there?

(c)How do the Rabanan learn this from the Pasuk "Ki Mishneh S'char Sachir"?

(d)How does Rebbi Elazar counter that?

3)

(a)The Rabanan learn the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk in Mishpatim "Im Adonav Yiten Lo Ishah") "Lo", 've'Lo l'Mocher Atzmo'.

(b)Rebbi Elazar learns from there "Lo", 'Ba'al Korcho' (with or without his consent).

(c)The Rabanan learn this from the Pasuk "Ki Mishneh S'char Sachir" which implies that this is the right of the master, with or without the Eved Ivri's consent.

(d)Rebbi Elazar argues that there is nothing in this to suggest that it is speaking without the Eved Ivri's consent.

4)

(a)Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov explains the Pasuk in B'har "v'Shav El Mishpachto ... " (to teach us that an Eved Ivri goes out with the advent of the Yovel). Why can the Pasuk refer neither to a Mocher Atzmo nor to a Nirtza?

(b)So what is the Pasuk referring to?

(c)How do we try to prove from here that Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov is the Tana who does not hold of "Sachir" "Sachir"?

(d)On what grounds does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak refute this suggestion? Even assuming that Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov learns the 'Gezeirah-Shavah', why would he not learn Machruhu Beis-Din from Mocher Atzmo in this regard?

4)

(a)Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov explains the Pasuk in Behar "v'Shav El Mishpachto ... " (to teach us that an Eved Ivri goes out with the advent of the Yovel). This Pasuk can refer neither to a Mocher Atzmo nor to a Nirtza, since both have already been mentioned ('Ad Sh'nas ha'Yovel Ya'avod Imach" and "v'Shavtem Ish El Achuzaso" respectively).

(b)Consequently, the Pasuk can only be referring to a Machruhu Beis-Din.

(c)We try to prove from here that Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov is the Tana who does not hold of "Sachir" "Sachir" because, if he did, why would he need an extra Pasuk for Machruhu Beis-Din. Why could he not learn it from Mocher Atzmo via the Gezeirah-Shavah "Sachir" "Sachir".

(d)Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak refutes this suggestion however on the grounds that, even assuming that Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov learns the 'Gezeirah-Shavah', he would not learn Machruhu Beis-Din from in this regard since, unlike Mocher Atzmo, he was sold for having sinned, in which we may have thought that the Gezeirah-Shavah, he must serve out his full six-year term. (Note, that one can only ask a Pircha on a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' if only one of the words is redundant, but not if they both are).

5)

(a)We establish "v'Shavtem Ish El Achuzaso" by a Nirtza (to teach us that when the Yovel arrives, he goes free). How does Rava bar Shilo extrapolate from the Pasuk itself that it is speaking about a Nirtza?

(b)Having taught us that ...

1. ... a Machruhu Beis-Din goes free in the Yovel, why does the Torah need to repeat the Din by a Nirtza?

2. ... a Nirtza goes free in the Yovel, why does the Torah to repeat the Din by a Machruhu Beis-Din?

(c)And why does the Torah find it necessary to write both the Pasuk of "v'Shavtem" (by Nirtza) and "va'Avado Le'olam"? Having written ...

1. ... "Le'olam", why does it need to write "v'Shavtem"?

2. ... "v'Shavtem", why does it need to write "Le'olam"?

5)

(a)We establish "v'Shavtem Ish El Achuzaso" by a Nirtza (to teach us that when the Yovel arrives, he goes free). Rava bar Shilo extrapolates from the Pasuk itself that it is speaking about a Nirtza because the Torah uses the word "Ish", hinting at 'Retzi'ah' which does not apply to a woman (as we learned earlier).

(b)Having taught us that ...

1. ... a Machruhu Beis-Din goes free in the Yovel, the Torah nevertheless needs to repeat the Din by a Nirtza because we might otherwise have thought that we punish the latter to make him serve a full six-year term (even if Yovel occurs in the middle), for deliberately remaining after his initial term came to an end.

2. ... a Nirtza goes free in the Yovel, the Torah needs to repeat the Din by a Machruhu Beis-Din because we would otherwise have thought that we punish the latter for having stolen by making him serve his full term (as we just explained).

(c)The Torah also finds it necessary to write both the Pasuk of "v'Shavtem" (by Nirtza) and "va'Avado Le'olam". In spite of having written ...

1. ... "Le'olam" it needs to write "v'Shavtem" because we would otherwise have interpreted "Le'olam" literally, and he would never have gone free.

2. ... "v'Shavtem" it needs to write "Le'olam" because we would otherwise have thought that he works for another six-year period and then goes free.

15b----------------------------------------15b

6)

(a)The Torah writes in B'har (in connection with a Nimkar l'Akum [a Jew who sells himself to a Nochri]) "v'Im Lo Yiga'El b'Eleh". What does "b'Eleh" refer to?

(b)Rebbi in a Beraisa, extrapolates from there "b'Eleh Hu Nig'Al, v'Eino Nig'Al b'Shesh". How does he learn a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Mocher Atzmo that, if not for "b'Eleh", he would go out after six years?

(c)What leads us to initially believe that Rebbi is the Tana who does not hold of "Sachir" "Sachir"?

(d)Based on the Pasuk (written by a Nimkar l'Akum) "O Dodo O ben Dodo Yig'alenu", how does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak reject the proof from there?

6)

(a)The Torah writes in B'har (in connection with a Nimkar l'Akum [a Jew who sells himself to a Nochri]) "v'Im Lo Yiga'El b'Eleh" which refers to Ge'ulas K'rovim' (being redeemed by relatives).

(b)Rebbi in a Beraisa, extrapolates from there "b'Eleh Hu Nig'Al, v'Eino Nig'Al b'Shesh". He learns a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Mocher Atzmo, who cannot be redeemed by relatives, yet he goes free after six years, then certainly a Nimkar l'Akum, who can, should go free after six years (if not for "b'Eleh").

(c)What leads us to initially believe that Rebbi is the Tana who does not hold of "Sachir" "Sachir" is that, if he did, then why does he say that a Mocher Atzmo cannot be redeemed by relatives? Why does he not learn via the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Sachir" "Sachir" from a Nimkar l'Akum, that he can? (Note, that until now, we have been referring to learning a Mocher Atzmo from a Machruhu Beis-Din; not we are referring to learning it from a Nimkar l'Akum (where the Torah also writes "Ki'S'chir Shanah b'Shanah Yiheyeh Imo").

(d)Based on the Pasuk (written by a Nimkar l'Akum) "O Dodo O ben Dodo Yig'alenu", Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak rejects the proof from there because the Derashah "Yig'alenu", 'la'Zeh v'Lo l'Acher' (precluding a Mocher Atzmo from being redeemed by relatives) overrides the 'Gezeirah-Shavah'.

7)

(a)Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili and Rebbi Akiva disagree with Rebbi. Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili Darshens from "b'Eleh", 'be'Eleh l'Shichrur, v'Sha'ar Kol Adam l'Shibud'. What does this mean?

(b)What does Rebbi Akiva say?

(c)We initially base their dispute on their respective interpretations of the Pasuk "v'Im Lo Yiga'El b'Eleh, v'Yatza bi'Sh'nas ha'Yovel". How does Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili learn his opinion from here?

(d)Rebbi Akiva Darshens the Pasuk "v'Im Lo Yiga'El Ela b'Eleh, v'Yazta bi'Sh'nas ha'Yovel", meaning that it is when he is redeemed by relatives that he must work until the Yovel. Why is this interpretation unacceptable?

7)

(a)Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili and Rebbi Akiva disagree with Rebbi. Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili Darshens from "b'Eleh", 'be'Eleh l'Shichrur, v'Sha'ar Kol Adam l'Shibud' meaning that if relatives redeem the Eved Ivri from the Nochri he goes free, but if others redeem him, he has to work for them until the Yovel.

(b)Rebbi Akiva says the exact opposite (that he has to work for the relatives but goes free if redeemed by others).

(c)We initially base their dispute on their respective interpretations of the Pasuk "v'Im Lo Yiga'El b'Eleh, v'Yatza bi'Sh'nas ha'Yovel", which Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili interprets literally to mean that if he is not redeemed by relatives (but by somebody else), then he goes free only in the Yovel.

(d)Rebbi Akiva Darshens the Pasuk "v'Im Lo Yiga'El Ela b'Eleh, v'Yazta bi'Sh'nas ha'Yovel", meaning that it is when he is redeemed by relatives that he must work until the Yovel. This interpretation is unacceptable however because Rebbi Akiva's Derashah adds the word 'Ela', where it is not written.

8)

(a)So we cite another source (though still connected with the Derashah from "b'Eleh", as we shall soon see) to explain their Machlokes, based on the Pasuk "O Dodo ... Yig'alenu, O Hisigah Yado, v'Nig'Al". "O Dodo ... Yig'alenu" obviously refers to the redemption of relatives. To what does ...

1. ... "O Hisigah Yado" refer?

2. ... "v'Nig'Al" refer?

(b)Bearing in mind that the Torah places Ge'ulas Atzmo in the middle, how do we now attempt to interpret the Machlokes between Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili and Rebbi Akiva?

(c)Then why do we need "b'Eleh"? How would we have learned without it?

(d)On what grounds do we reject this explanation too?

8)

(a)So we cite another source (though still connected with the Derashah from "b'Eleh", as we shall soon see) to explain their Machlokes, based on the Pasuk "O Dodo ... Yig'alenu, O Hisigah Yado, v'Nig'Al". "O Dodo ... Yig'alenu" obviously refers to the redemption of relatives. The Pasuk ...

1. ... "O Hisigah Yado" refers to Ge'ulas Atzmo.

2. ... "v'Nig'Al" refers Ge'ulas Acheirim.

(b)Bearing in mind that the Torah places Ge'ulas Atzmo in the middle, we now attempt to interpret the Machlokes Tana'im in that Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili Darshens backwards ('Lefanav'), comparing Ge'ulas Atzmo (where the Eved Ivri obviously goes free) to Ge'ulas K'rovim which precedes it; whereas Rebbi Akiva Darshens forwards ('le'Acharav'), comparing it to Ge'ulas Acheirim which is written after it.

(c)We nevertheless need "b'Eleh" because we would otherwise Darshen both backwards and forwards, setting the Eved Ivri free both by Ge'ulas K'rovim and by Ge'ulas Acheirim.

(d)We reject this explanation too however for the same reason that we rejected the previous one (because Rebbi Akiva is forcing the Pasuk to say what it does not).

9)

(a)We finally base the Machlokes on S'varos. What is the Sevara of ...

1. ... Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili? What brings him to the conclusion that by Ge'ulas Acheirim, the Eved Ivri is more likely to have to work for those who redeem him?

2. ... Rebbi Akiva? Why makes him think that this is more likely to be the case by Ge'ulas K'rovim?

(b)How will Rebbi Akiva explain "b'Eleh", which until now, we have seen, supported Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili's explanation?

(c)Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan restricts the above opinions to the two Tana'im concerned, but according to the Chachamim, he goes free both by Ge'ulas K'rovim and by Ge'ulas Acheirim. Who is the Rabanan? On what grounds do they argue with Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili and Rebbi Akiva?

(d)How then, does Rebbi interpret the Pasuk "v'Yatza bi'Shenas ha'Yovel"?

9)

(a)We finally base the Machlokes on a S'varos. The Sevara of ...

1. ... Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili is that by Ge'ulas Acheirim, the Eved Ivri is more likely to have to work for them because otherwise, what incentive will total strangers have to redeem

2. ... Rebbi Akiva is that by Ge'ulas Acheirim, this is more likely to be the case because otherwise, whoever needs money will go and sell himself to a Nochri, in the knowledge that his good relatives will redeem him, and he will go free.

(b)Rebbi Akiva will explain that "b'Eleh" (which until now, we have seen, supported Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili's explanation) pertains, not to Ge'ulas K'rovim, as we thought until now, but to Ge'ulas Acheirim, which are mentioned just before it (in the word "v'Nig'Al", as we just explained).

(c)Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan restricts the above opinions to the two Tana'im concerned, but according to the Chachamim, he goes free both by Ge'ulas K'rovim and by Ge'ulas Acheirim. The Rabanan is Rebbi, who uses "b'Eleh" for "b'Eleh" 'Hu Nig'Al, v'Eino Nig'Al b'Shesh'. Consequently, there is nothing to restrict the Derashah from Ge'ulas Atzmo, and to say 'Mikra Nidrash bein mi'Lefanav u'vein mi'le'Acharav'.

(d)According to Rebbi, the Pasuk "v'Yatza bi'Shenas ha'Yovel" speaks when the Eved Ivri was not redeemed (and is referring to a Nochri who lives under our jurisdiction). It is coming to teach us that, under no circumstances, may one force him to relinquish his rights over the Eved Ivri before the Yovel.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF