QUESTION: Rebbi and Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar disagree about when a Yesomah, a girl whose father died, is no longer eligible to receive her Nedunya from her father's estate -- the "Isur Nechasim," or "Parnasah," which is the dowry given to her from one-tenth of her father's estate (see Chart #11). According to Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, a Na'arah who gets married, and a Bogeres even before she gets married, are not entitled to receive the "Isur Nechasim."

RASHI (DH Af Ivdu) writes (as the Shitah Mekubetzes explains) that a Na'arah who is married and a Bogeres do not receive their "Isur Nechasim" for two different reasons. The reason why the Bogeres does not receive it is because the Rabanan did not institute that a Bogeres receive "Isur Nechasim" since she is able to take care of herself; she is no longer dependent upon the estate and is not entitled to any part of it. In contrast, a Na'arah who is married is entitled to part of the estate, but since she became married without first claiming her "Isur Nechasim" she showed that she willfully forfeited her entitlement to the "Isur Nechasim."

Rashi's explanation raises a number of questions. How does Rashi know that Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar's ruling regarding a Na'arah who is married and a Bogeres stem from two different lines of reasoning? Rashi should have explained simply that Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar rules that a Na'arah who gets married no longer has anything to do with her father's estate, like a Bogeres!

Moreover, it is clear from the Gemara's conclusion that Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar must rule that a Na'arah who gets married is removed from her father's estate, like a Bogeres, and that she does not receive the "Isur Nechasim" even if she protests ("Mochah") its revocation. This is clear from the Gemara's statement that even Rebbi agrees that a Na'arah who gets married loses her "Isur Nechasim" if she does not protest, and that the Beraisa in which Rebbi argues with Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar is discussing a Na'arah who does protest. Obviously, then, Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar who disagrees with Rebbi maintains that even if the Na'arah does protest she does not receive the "Isur Nechasim" (as RABEINU YONAH points out, as quoted by the Shitah Mekubetzes)!

ANSWER: Rashi finds it necessary to explain the Gemara's original understanding of Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar in the way that he does because the Gemara attempts to attribute the statement of the Mishnah (68a) to Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar (see Rashi, DH Vitrah). The Mishnah does not say that a Na'arah who gets married has no entitlement to the "Isur Nechasim." It says only that a Na'arah who gets married loses the "Isur Nechasim" if she does not protest and accepts less than a tenth of the estate at the time of her wedding. The Gemara must have understood that the Na'arah who gets married loses the rights to the "Isur Nechasim" according to Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar only because she did not protest and she willingly forfeited it (and not because she has no entitlement to it at all).

The Gemara later concludes that the Mishnah is expressing Rebbi's opinion and not the opinion of Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar. Accordingly, Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar must be of the opinion that a Na'arah who is married never receives "Isur Nechasim," even if she does protest at the time.

QUESTION: The Gemara explains that the Mishnah (68a) -- which implies that a Gedolah who gets married and does not protest when her brothers do not give her the "Isur Nechasim" loses her entitlement to the "Isur Nechasim" -- follows the opinion of Rebbi. The Gemara proves from a Beraisa that this indeed is Rebbi's opinion. In the Beraisa, Rebbi states that a girl receives the "Isur Nechasim" upon her marriage only if she is supported by her brothers. If her brothers are not providing her with support, she does not receive the "Isur Nechasim. Why does Rebbi say that she loses the "Isur Nechasim" when she is not being supported if he also says that a Bogeres who is not being supported does receive the "Isur Nechasim"? It must be that the statement in which Rebbi associates the right to receive "Isur Nechasim" to Mezonos (being supported) refers to a Bogeres who did not protest when she was not given the "Isur Nechasim." If she protests, however, she receives the "Isur Nechasim."

Rashi explains that when Rebbi (in the Beraisa) states that a girl who is supported by her brothers receives the "Isur Nechasim" (even when she does not protest), he refers to a Ketanah or a Na'arah.

Why does Rashi write that the Beraisa refers to a Na'arah and that a Na'arah receives the "Isur Nechasim" even if she does not protest? The Mishnah implies that a Na'arah (that is, any Gedolah) loses the "Isur Nechasim" when she does not protest! (MAHARSHA, MAHARAM)

ANSWER: The MAHARSHA and MAHARAM answer that the Mishnah -- which implies that a Na'arah loses the "Isur Nechasim" when she does not protest -- refers to a Na'arah who has married (which parallels the Mishnah's case of a Ketanah who married). The Beraisa, on the other hand, which says that as long as she receives Mezonos she does not have to protest in order to receive the "Isur Nechasim," refers to a Na'arah who has not yet married. Since she has not yet married she does not need to protest in order to receive the "Isur Nechasim."

The Maharsha points out that Rashi makes this clear (in DH Nizones) when he says that Rebbi in the Beraisa refers to a Na'arah "who is coming to get married," in contrast to a Na'arah who is already married.