TWO DOCUMENTS FOR THE SAME TRANSACTION
(Rav Huna): She may collect whichever Kesuvah she wants.
Suggestion: He argues with Rav Nachman.
(Rav Nachman): If there are two documents (of sale or gift for the same property to the same recipient) with different dates, the latter invalidates the former.
Rejection: They need not argue!
(Rav Papa): Rav Nachman admits that if the second document adds on a date tree, it was written for the addition and does not invalidate the first document.
Also in Rav Huna's case, the second Kesuvah adds to the first!
Clearly, if the first document was a sale and the second is a gift, the second does not invalidate the first. It was written to protect the buyer from the law of Bar Metzra. (When land is sold, the neighbors have first rights to buy it. This does not apply to gifts.)
All the more so, if the first was a gift, and the second was a sale, it does not invalidate the first. The second was written to guarantee the receiver compensation if the property will be taken by creditors.
When both are sale documents or both are gifts, the latter invalidates the former.
Question: What is the reason?
Answer #1 (Rafram): The recipient requested another document because he agrees that the first one is invalid.
Answer #2 (Rav Acha): The recipient pardoned the earlier lien.
There are three practical differences between these reasons:
According to Answer #1, the recipient invalidates the witnesses (or signatures) on his first document (he cannot rely on them for other documents);
According to Answer #1, the recipient must pay for produce he ate from the land between the dates on the two documents;
According to Answer #1, the seller must pay the property taxes for the period between the documents.
Question: How do we rule (about question 4:a, Daf 43B)?
Answer (Rav Yehudah): R. Eliezer bar R. Shimon says that 100 or 200 is collected from the Kidushin. Tosefes is collected from the Nisu'in;
Chachamim say that all is collected from the Nisu'in.
The Halachah follows Chachamim.
TO WHICH CONVERTS DO THE LAWS OF MOTZI SHEM RA APPLY?
(Mishnah): If a woman converted with her daughter and the daughter was Mezanah (while she was a Na'arah Me'orasah), she is strangled. She is not killed at her father's doorway, and there is no fine of 100 Shekalim if her husband is (falsely) Motzi Shem Ra against her;
If her mother converted between conception and birth, she is stoned (for such Znus), but not at her father's doorway, and there is no fine of 100;
If her mother converted before conception, she is like a Bas Yisrael in all respects.
Even if a girl has a father but her father has no doorway, or his house has a doorway but she has no father, her punishment is stoning;
The Mitzvah is to stone her at the father's door. If this cannot be done, she is still stoned.
(Gemara - Reish Lakish): "And she will die" teaches that she is stoned even if her mother converted between conception and birth.
Question: If so, one who is Motzi Shem Ra on her should be lashed and pay!
Answer: "And she will die" applies to execution, not to a fine.
Suggestion: Perhaps this is only if the conversion was before conception!
Rejection: Such a girl is a regular Bas Yisrael. The verse is not needed in such a case.
Suggestion: Perhaps the verse includes even if the conversion was after birth!
Rejection: "B'Yisrael" excludes this.
MOTZI SHEM RA ON AN ORPHAN
(R. Yosi bar Chanina): One who is Motzi Shem Ra on an orphan is exempt. "He will give to the father of the Na'arah" excludes an orphan.
Question (R. Yosi bar Avin - Beraisa - R. Yosi ha'Glili): The repetition "Im Ma'en Yima'en" teaches that also an orphan receives a fine!
Answer (R. Yosi bar Avin): That is when she was orphaned between the seduction and the trial.
(Rava): One who is Motzi Shem Ra on an orphan is punished:
(Ami - Beraisa): "A virgin of Yisrael" excludes a virgin convert.
Question: We understand this if Motzi Shem Ra on an orphan is normally punished. The verse exempts Motzi Shem Ra on a convert.
But if one is always exempt for an orphan, why must a verse exempt for a convert? (According to Halachah, she has no father!)
(Reish Lakish): Motzi Shem Ra on a minor is exempt - "He will give to the father of the Na'arah." Na'arah is written full (with a Hei), to teach that we discuss a full (adult) Na'arah.
Objection (Rav Acha bar Aba): Even without the Hei, we would know that a minor is not included!
"The Na'arah... will be stoned" - we do not punish a minor!
Rather, here the Torah discusses a full Na'arah. When Na'arah is written without a Hei, it includes even a minor.