Question: According to R. Chanina, we understand "if a man did not lie with you... Hinaki (you will be blessed." This implies that if she was Mezanah, she will be cursed);

According to R. Meir, it should also say 'if you lied with a man, Chinaki (you will be choked)'!

Answer: "Hinaki" is written without a Yud. It also alludes to 'Chinaki'.

Question: According to R. Meir, we understand why "Hinaki" is written without a Yud (like above);

According to R. Chanina, why was this necessary. We can infer that if she lied with a man, she will be choked!

Answer: One might have thought that if a man did not lie with her, she will be blessed. If she lied with a man, even though she transgressed, she will neither be blessed nor cursed. Hinaki teaches that this is not so.

Question: According to R. Meir, we understand "Hu Yischata Bo (he will be sprinkled with water with ashes of the red heifer) on the third day and the seventh day" and "if he will not be Yischata...";

According to R. Chanina, why was this necessary?

Answer: One might have thought that l'Chatchilah, he should be sprinkled on days three and seven, but b'Di'eved, if he was sprinkled on either of them, he is Tahor The Kefel teaches that this is not so.

Question: Why must it say "the Tahor one will sprinkle on the Tamei one on the third day and the seventh day"?

Answer: Had it said only the first verse, one might have thought that it says "third" and "seventh" to exclude the second and sixth days, for not enough time has elapsed from when he became Tamei, but sprinkling on the third and eighth days would be Metaher, for there are more days since the Tum'ah. The repetition teaches that this is not so.

Question: Why does it say (at the end of the above verse) "he will be Metaher him on the seventh day"?

Answer: One might have thought that to eat Kodshim, he needs sprinkling on days three and seven, but to eat Terumah, it suffices to be sprinkled on one of them. These words teach that this is not so (he is not Tahor at all until day seven).

(Mishnah): If Reuven was Mekadesh Leah, and he erred about her lineage (if she is a Bas Kohen or a Bas Levi) or her wealth (rich or poor), she is Mekudeshes, for she did not trick him.

If now Sam cannot be Mekadesh Sally, Kidushin will not take effect even if he stipulates that it take effect after the obstacle to Kidushin is removed, e.g.:

After he converts or is freed;

After she converts or is freed;

After the death of her husband or her sister (Sam's wife);

After she does Chalitzah.

Similarly, if Reuven told Shimon 'if your wife gives birth to a girl, she is Mekudeshes to me' (and gave money to him), she is not Mekudeshes.

(Gemara - Mishnah): We cannot separate detached Peros to be Terumah on (exempt) attached Peros, nor vice-versa. B'Di'eved, it does not take effect.

Question (Rav Asi): If one said 'detached Peros of this patch should be Terumah on the attached Peros of this patch (or vice-versa) when they are picked' does this work (after they are picked)?

Answer (R. Yochanan): If something cannot take effect until an action is done, if he is able to to the action, it is if it was done.

Question (Mishnah): Kidushin does not work even if he stipulates that it should take effect after he or she converts or is freed, after the death of her husband or her sister, or after she does Chalitzah.

Granted, the last cases are not in his control, but he can convert if he wants!

Answer: No, he cannot convert at will;

(R. Chiya bar Aba): Conversion must be in front of a Beis Din of three.

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: Conversion is called Mishpat, like monetary judgments.

(Summation of answer): One cannot convert whenever he wants. Perhaps he will not find a Beis Din of three to convert him.

Question (R. Aba bar Mamal): If so, if Reuven is Mekadesh his Shifchah to take effect after Reuven frees her, it should work (since he can free her at will)!

Answer: A Shifchah's acceptance of Kidushin (even with intent for after freedom) is meaningless.

Suggestion: R. Yochanan would argue about R. Oshiya's law.

(R. Oshaya): If Shimon gave to his wife a Perutah and said 'you are Mekudeshes to me after I will divorce you' she is not Mekudeshes (after he divorces her).

Rejection: No. Granted, Shimon can divorce his wife, but he cannot be Mekadesh her again without her consent.

Suggestion: We can resolve R. Oshiya's question.

Question (R. Oshaya): If Reuven gave two Perutos to Leah and said 'you are Mekudeshes to me today with one Perutah, and you are Mekadesh to me with the other Perutah after I will divorce you', does the second Kidushin work?

Since he cannot Mekadesh her again without her consent, he cannot stipulate to do this!

Rejection: No. Perhaps since Kidushin is Tofes (takes effect) now, he can Mekadesh her also for after divorce.

Support (for R. Yochanan - Beraisa): One may not separate detached Peros to be Terumah on attached Peros. B'Di'eved, it does not take effect.

The case is, he said 'detached Peros of this patch are Terumah on the attached Peros of this patch (or vice-versa)' this has no effect;

If he said, they will be Terumah when they are picked, it works (after they are picked).

R. Eliezer ben Yakov says, even if he said 'detached Peros of this patch should be Terumah on the attached Peros of this patch (or vice-versa) after they grow to a third of their full growth and are picked', this works.

Version #1 (Rabah): R. Eliezer ben Yakov said so only if the grain already grew enough to be used for fodder;

(Rav Yosef): He said so even if it is Agam (soft sproutings).

Question: What is the source that Agam means something that can be bent?

Answer: "Will a man bend his head as an Agmon (hook)?"

Question: Does R. Chanina hold like Rabah or like Rav Yosef?

(Mishnah): If Reuven told Shimon 'if your wife gives birth to a girl, she is Mekudeshes to me', this has no effect.

(R. Chanina): This is only if Shimon's wife is not pregnant. If she is pregnant (and gives birth to a girl), the daughter is Mekudeshes (when she is born).

Answer: If R. Chanina holds like Rabah, she must be visibly pregnant. If he holds like Rav Yosef, it is even if she is not visibly pregnant.)

Version #2 (Rabah): R. Eliezer ben Yakov discusses Shachas (grain that can be used for fodder), in a field nourished solely by rain, but not in a field that needs irrigation (for often, such fodder does not develop into grain);

(Rav Yosef): R. Eliezer ben Yakov discusses Shachas even in a field that needs irrigation.

Question: Does R. Chanina hold like Rabah or like Rav Yosef?

(Mishnah): If Reuven told Shimon 'if your wife gives birth to a girl, she is Mekudeshes to me', this has no effect.

(R. Chanina): This is only if Shimon's wife is not pregnant. If she is pregnant, the daughter is Mekudeshes.

Answer: She must be visibly pregnant. R. Chanina can hold like Rabah or like Rav Yosef.