Mishnah 1
Hear the Mishnah

1)

(a)The Mishnah discusses a case where a woman who is divorced or widowed claims that when she married she was a Besulah, whilst her husband maintains that she was an Almanah. How can her husband make a claim in the case where she is widowed?

(b)In what connection are they arguing?

1)

(a)The Mishnah discusses a case where a woman who is divorced or widowed claims that when she married she was a Besulah, whilst her husband maintains that she was an Almanah. Obviously, 'her husband maintains ... ' pertains to when she is divorced. If she is a widow, then it is the heirs who claim.

(b)They are arguing - in connection with her Kesubah, as to whether she receives two hundred Zuz or one hundred (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

2)

(a)The Tana Kama rules that she is believed, provided she has witnesses either that she went to the Chupah 'be'Heinuma' or that her head was uncovered (both of which were customary at the wedding of a Besulah, but not at that of an Almanah). 'Heinuma' might mean that the Chupah comprised myrtle twigs. What else might it mean?

(b)According to the latter reason, why is it called by that name?

(c)And what does 'her head uncovered' mean?

(d)What third possible proof (that she was a Besulah) does Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah add?

(e)What other condition is required for the woman to lose her right two hundred Zuz?

2)

(a)The Tana Kama rules that she is believed provided she has witnesses either that she went to the Chupah 'be'Heinuma' or that her head was uncovered (both of which were customary at the wedding of a Besulah,, but not at that of an Almanah). 'Heinuma' either means that the Chupah comprised myrtle twigs, or that - she wore a veil.

(b)According to the latter reason, it is called by that name - because the Kalah would be able to doze off (Tenumah) without anyone noticing (See also Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)'Her head uncovered' means - with her hair cascading over her shoulders.

(d)The third possible proof (that she was a Besulah) added by Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah is - the distribution of roasted ears of corn (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(e)The other condition for the woman to lose her right to two hundred Zuz is - that she cannot find her Kesubah.

Mishnah 2
Hear the Mishnah

3)

(a)On what grounds does Rebbi Yehoshua believe Reuven, who admits that the field that Shimon is claiming from him belonged to his (Shimon's) father, but that he had bought it from him?

(b)By what other name is this kind of Migu known as?

(c)Why does the Mishnah say that 'he concedes'? To whom does he concede?

(d)For what similar reason might Rebbi Yehoshua have conceded to Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer in the case of 'me'she'Erastani Ne'enasti'?

(e)Why does he then concede here but not there?

3)

(a)Rebbi Yehoshua believes Reuven, who admits that the field that Shimon is claiming from him belonged to his (Shimon's) father, but that he had bought it from him - based on a 'Migu' that he could just as well have remained silent and made out that it was his all the time.

(b)This kind of 'Migu' is also known as - 'ha'Peh she'Asar Hu ha'Peh she'Hitir'.

(c)The Mishnah says that 'he concedes' - because in the previous Perek, he disagreed with Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer, who believed the girl in the case of 'me'she'Erastani Ne'enasti' ...

(d)... in spite of the 'Migu' - since she could have claimed that she was a Mukas Eitz (which is a better argument, seeing as she would then have remained permitted to marry a Kohen, whereas her current argument forbids her to do so).

(e)And the reason that he concedes here but not there is - because the Chachamim tend to be more stringent by Isur than by money issues, such as the case here (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

4)

(a)On what condition does Rebbi Yehoshua not believe Reuven in this case either?

(b)Why does the Tana see fit to mention this? Why is it not obvious?

4)

(a)Rebbi Yehoshua does not believe Reuven in this case either - if there are witnesses that the field previously belonged to Shimon's father (since the 'Migu' will no longer be applicable).

(b)And the Tana sees fit to mention this - to teach us that even though Reuven ate the produce for two out of three years (that constitute a Chazakah) during the life-time of Shimon's father and one year after his death, to teach us that the last year does not combine with the first two to form a Chazakah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

Mishnah 3
Hear the Mishnah

5)

(a)What does the Mishnah say about witnesses who verify their signatures on a document but claim that they were forced to sign 'at gun-point' (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?

(b)What if they claimed that they were children or Pesulei Eidus (See Tos. Yom-Tov) when they wrote it?

(c)Based on which principle are they believed?

5)

(a)The Mishnah rules that witnesses who verify their signatures on a document but claim that they were forced to sign 'at gun-point') are believed (See Tos. Yom-Tov), and the same will apply ...

(b)... if they claimed that they were children or Pesulei Eidus (See Tos. Yom-Tov) when they wrote it ...

(c)... based on the principle 'ha'Peh she'Asar hu ha'Peh she'Hitir'.

6)

(a)Why are they not believed if they claim that they were threatened that if they declined to sign, the perpetrators would take their money?

(b)Why are they nevertheless not believed in the same way as they were in the previous case?

(c)By the same token, when is the claim that they were Pesulei Eidus ...

1. ... believed?

2. ... not believed?

6)

(a)They are not believed however, if they claim that they were threatened that if they declined to sign, the perpetrators would take their money - because as long as their lives are not in danger, it is forbidden to give invalid testimony.

(b)The reason that they are not believed if they claim that they were threatened that if they declined to sign, the perpetrators would take their money is - because in this case, their testimony renders them Resha'im, and based on the fact that a person is his own relative, we have a principle that 'Ein Adam Meisim Atzmo Rasha' (a person who testifies that he is a Rasha is not believed [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).

(c)And by the same token, Pesulei Eidus are ...

1. ... believed - only if they claim that they were relatives ...

2. ... but not if they claim that they were Pasul due to a sin that they committed.

7)

(a)One of the cases where they are not believed at all is where their signatures have been verified by others. What is the other?

7)

(a)One of the cases where they are not believed at all is where their signatures have been verified by others; the other, is - where their signatures can be verified from another document which they signed (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

Mishnah 4
Hear the Mishnah

8)

(a)On what grounds does the Mishnah believe them if each witness testifies on his own signature and on that of his friend?

(b)If each witness is only able to testify only on his own signature, Rebbi requires them to find a second witness for each signature. What do the Chachamim say?

(c)What is the basis of their Machlokes

8)

(a)The Mishnah believes them if each witness testifies on his own signature and on that of his friend - since each signature now has two witnesses.

(b)If each witness is only able to testify only on his own signature, Rebbi requires them to find a second witness for each signature; whereas according to the Chachamim - that is not necessary.

(c)The basis of their Machlokes is that it depends on what they are actually testifying - on their signatures (Rebbi) or on the Manah in the Sh'tar (the Chachamim).

9)

(a)Based on the same principle that governs the current Mishnahs, what ia the Din regarding a woman who claims that she was married but is now divorced (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?

(b)On what condition is she believed?

9)

(a)Based on the same principle that governs the current Mishnahs, a woman who claims that she was married but is now divorced (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - is believed ...

(b)... provided there are no witnesses that she was married.

10)

(a)What are the Halachic ramifications of a woman who was captured?

(b)Why is that?

(c)What does the Tana now say about a woman who claims that she was captured but that she was not raped?

(d)On what condition does he forbid her to marry a Kohen?

10)

(a)A woman who was captured - is forbidden to marry a Kohen ...

(b)... because she has the Din of a Zonah, who is forbidden to a Kohen.

(c)The Tana now rules that a woman who claims that she was captured but that she was not raped - is believed, and is therefore permitted to marry a Kohen ...

(d)... unless there are witnesses that she was captured.

11)

(a)What does the Mishnah say about the latter case, but where the witnesses arrive after the woman is already married to a Kohen?

(b)What does 'already married' incorporate?

(c)What if witnesses testify that she was raped?

11)

(a)In the latter case, but where the witnesses arrive only after the woman is already married to a Kohen - the Mishnah rules that her husband is not obligated to divorce her ...

(b)... even if she is still single but has received permission from Beis-Din to marry a Kohen.

(c)If however, witnesses testify that she was raped, then - even if she has children from the Kohen that she married, her husband is obligated to divorce her.

Mishnah 6
Hear the Mishnah

12)

(a)Bearing in mind the previous Mishnah, why does the Tana reject the testimony of two women who claim that they were captured but not raped?

(b)On what condition does he accept it?

(c)On what basis is she believed?

(d)Who else, besides a woman, is specifically included as being eligible to testify in this matter?

(e)On what ...

1. ... condition is one witness believed?

2. ... additional condition is a Katan believed

12)

(a)Despite the previous Mishnah, the Tana rejects the testimony of two women who claim that they were captured (See Tos. Yom-Tov) but not raped - because he is speaking where witnesses testify that they were captured.

(b)He accepts it however - provided each one testifies that the other one was not raped ...

(c)... since the Chachamim were lenient regarding captives (See Tos. Yom-Tov) and believed even one witness and even a woman ...

(d)... an Eved and a Katan.

(e)They are only believed however, on ...

1. ... condition that they did not leave the woman's side from the moment she was captured until she was set free, whereas ...

2. ... a Katan is only believed if he is 'Masi'ach L'fi Tumo' (but not if his intention is to testify) See also Tos. Yom-Tov.

Mishnah 7
Hear the Mishnah

13)

(a)The Mishnah compares the previous case to two people who claim to be Kohanim. Why are they making this claim?

(b)On what condition are they believed?

13)

(a)The Mishnah compares the previous case to two people who claim to be Kohanim - in order to receive Terumah (See Tos. Yom-Tov), and ...

(b)... who are believed - provided they include their friend in their testimony ('I am a Kohen and so is my friend').

Mishnah 8
Hear the Mishnah

14)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah maintains that one witness is not believed to testify that so-and-so is a Kohen, even where there are not two people testifying for each other. Why is the suspicion higher there where there are?

(b)What does he say if there is only one witness testifying for one person?

(c)On what condition does Rebbi Elazar agree with Rebbi Yehudah?

(d)What exactly does 'Or'rin' comprise?

(e)In which point does Rebbi Elazar argue with the Tana Kama (even where there are no Or'rin)?

14)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah maintains that one witness is not believed to testify that so-and-so is a Kohen, even where there are not two people testifying for each other. The suspicion is higher there where there are, because of 'Gomlin' (that one says to the other 'You testify on my behalf and I will testify on yours!').

(b)Though in fact he holds, that - one witness is not believed, even if there is only one witness testifying for one person (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Einan Ne'emanim' & DH 'uvi'Zeman ... ' [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).

(c)Rebbi Elazar agrees with Rebbi Yehudah - only in a case where there Or'rin (objectors).

(d)'Or'rin' comprises - two witnesses (See Tos. Yom-Tov) who claim that he is not a Kohen.

(e)Rebbi Elazar argues with the Tana Kama (even where there are no Or'rin) - inasmuch as he does not believe even one witness there where 'Gomlin' is applicable.

15)

(a)What problem do we have with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel in the name of Rebbi Shimon ben ha'Segan, who rules that one witness is believed to instate a Kohen?

(b)To answer the Kashya, we establishing the case where the father was definitely a Kohen and following a Kol that the son is a ben Gerushah or a ben Chalutzah, they removed his status. What happened next?

(c)How does the case end?

15)

(a)The problem with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel in the name of Rebbi Shimon ben ha'Segan, who rules that one witness is believed to instate a Kohen is - that he seems to echo the opinion of Rebbi Elazar.

(b)To answer the Kashya, we establishing the case where the father was definitely a Kohen and following a Kol that the son is a ben Gerushah or a ben Chalutzah (See Tos. Yom-Tov), they removed his status - after which, one witness came and testified that he was in fact, a Kasher Kohen.

(c)Finally, after a second pair of witnesses corroborated the Kol, a second witness testifies that he is Kasher.

16)

(a)What is now the basis of the Machlokes between Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and Rebbi Elazar?

(b)Based on which principle do we accept the testimony of the two single witnesses against that of the pair, according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel?

(c)Like whom is the Halachah?

16)

(a)The basis of the Machlokes between Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and Rebbi Elazar is - whether two witnesses who testify at two different times can combine (Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel) or not (Rebbi Elazar).

(b)According to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, we accept the testimony of the two single witnesses against that of the pair - based on the Chezkas Kashrus of the Kohen (since the two pairs of witnesses cancel each other out).

(c)The Halachah is - like Rebbi Shimon ben Gamliel.

Mishnah 9
Hear the Mishnah

17)

(a)If a woman is captured by Nochrim, what distinction does the Mishnah draw between whether she is subsequently held to ransom or whether she is sentenced to death (and subsequently set free)?

(b)On what condition is the former permitted to return to her husband even if he is a Kohen?

(c)What is the reason for the lenient ruling?

(d)Why, on the other hand, is the latter forbidden even to her husband who is a Yisrael?

17)

(a)If a woman is captured by Nochrim, the Mishnah rules that if she is subsequently held to ransom - she is permitted to return to her husband, even if he is a Kohen, but not if she is sentenced to death (and is subsequently set free [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).

(b)The former is permitted - provided the rule of law is that of the Torah ...

(c)... and the reason for this is - because the woman's captors will be afraid to molest her, in order not to lose the ransom money.

(d)On the other hand, the latter is forbidden even to her husband who is a Yisrael - because we suspect that she deliberately had relations with one of her captors, in order to save her life.

18)

(a)What does the Tana say about a city that is captured following a siege?

(b)Why is that?

(c)On what condition are all the women permitted even without witnesses who testify that they were not raped?

(d)Why are they permitted even if they did not specifically claim that they hid there?

(e)What if there is a witness who is an Eved or a Shifchah?

18)

(a)The Tana rules that if a city is captured following a siege - all the wives of Kohanim who live there are forbidden to their husbands (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...

(b)... since the wife of a Kohen is forbidden to her husband, even if she was raped.

(c)All the women are permitted however, even without witnesses who testify that they were not raped - if there is even one hiding-place in the entire city ...

(d)... even if they did not specifically claim that they hid there - because of a Migu (since they could have done so, they are believed when they say that they did not hide, but are nevertheless Tahor [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).

(e)If there is one witness he/she is believed - even if he/she is an Eved or a Shifchah (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - then.

19)

(a)What does the Mishnah mean when it says that a man is not believed on himself?

(b)What did Rebbi Zecharyah ben ha'Katzav (who was a Kohen at the time of the destruction of the second Beis-ha'Mikdash) testify about his wife?

(c)He swore by 'ha'Ma'on ha'Zeh'. What did he mean by that?

(d)And what will be the Din regarding a man who ...

1. ... testifies that a woman who was captured was not raped?

2. ... redeems a woman from captivity?

(e)What is the reason for the latter ruling?

19)

(a)When the Mishnah says that a man is not believed on himself - he means that he is not believed if he testifies on behalf of his wife (such as) ...

(b)Rebbi Zecharyah ben ha'Katzav (who was a Kohen at the time of the destruction of the second Beis-ha'Mikdash and) who testified - that from the moment the enemy entered Yerushalayim, he did not withdraw his hand from that of his wife).

(c)He swore by 'ha'Ma'on ha'Zeh' - with reference to the Beis-ha'Mikdash.

(d)A man who ...

1. ... testifies that a woman who was captured was not raped - is believed, but is not subsequently permitted to marry her, though he is permitted to marry a woman whom he ...

2. ... redeems from captivity ...

(e)... since he would not risk spending all that money unless he was sure that she is Tahor.

Mishnah 10
Hear the Mishnah

20)

(a)What does the Mishnah say about a grown-up who verifies the signature of his father, his Rebbe or his brother, which he remembers from when he was small?

(b)On what basis do the Chachamim believe him?

(c)The first of an additional number of testimonies included in this list is where the witness remembers how a girl married with a Heinuma). What else does he testify about her?

(d)Why would we have thought that he is not believed?

(e)Why is he nevertheless believed?

20)

(a)The Mishnah rules that if a grown-up who verifies the signature of his father, his Rebbe or his brother (See Tos. Yom-Tov), which he remembers from when he was small - he is believed ...

(b)... because the need to verify documents is only mi'de'Rabbanan (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - so the Chachamim were lenient.

(c)The first of an additional number of testimonies included in this list is where the witness remembers how a girl married with a Heinuma) - and that her hair was uncovered.

(d)We would have thought that he is not believed - because extracting money from its owner generally requires two witnesses.

(e)He is nevertheless believed - because the majority of women who marry are Besulos (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

21)

(a)What does the man testify that, when he was small, he remembers a child used to do after leaving Cheder? What is the point of his testimony?

(b)How do we know that the latter was not an Eved Kohen (who is allowed to eat Terumah?

(c)He is only believed however, to feed him Terumah de'Rabbanan, but not Terumah d'Oraysa. What is an example of Terumah de'Rabbanan.

(d)In another case, what does he testify another friend used to do to prove that he was not the Eved of a Kohen?

(e)How do we know that he was not the Eved of a Kohen?

21)

(a)The man testifies that he remembers how, after leaving Cheder - a friend used to Tovel in order to eat Terumah.

(b)We know that the latter was not the Eved of a Kohen (who is allowed to eat Terumah) - because it is forbidden to teach an Eved Torah.

(c)He is only believed however, to feed him Terumah de'Rabbanan - such as crops that have grown in a pot with a hole, but not Terumah d'Oraysa.

(d)In another case, he testifies - how he used to go to the barn together with a friend to receive Terumah.

(e)We know that he was not he was not the Eved of a Kohen - because one is not permitted to give the Eved of a Kohen Terumah unless his master is with him.

22)

(a)Finally, the Mishnah believes the above witness if he declares a certain area a Beis ha'Peras (See Tos. Yom-Tov) or if he pinpoints the exact location up to which they used to walk on Shabbos What is a Beis-ha'Peras?

(b)On what basis is he believed in these two cases?

(c)What does the Tana say about a Gadol who, based on childhood memories, pinpoints the extremity of so-and-so's path or that someone had the right to perform Ma'amad and Moshav in a certain area?

(d)What is the definition of 'Ma'amad and Moshav'?

(e)Why is he not believed?

22)

(a)Finally, the Mishnah believes the above witness if he declares a certain area a Beis ha'Peras (See Tos. Yom-Tov) or if he pinpoints the exact location up to which they used to walk on Shabbos. A Beis-ha'Peras is a field in which a grave has been dug-up, and which is Tamei up to a distance of a hundred Amos in all directions, in case one walks over the bones of a Meis.

(b)He is believed in these two cases - since both involve Isurim de'Rabbanan (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 've'Ad Ka'an').

(c)Regarding a Gadol who, based on childhood memories, pinpoints the extremity of so-and-so's path or that someone had the right to perform Ma'amad and Moshav in a certain area however - the Tana rules that he is not believed.

(d)'Ma'amad and Moshav' - refers to a path which a person had rights to make Hespeidim and to perform Ma'amados and Moshavos when burying his deceased relatives (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(e)He is not believed - because monetary issues require two Kasher witnesses.

D.A.F. TALMUD RESOURCES
FOR MASECHES KESUVOS