More Discussions for this daf
1. Leaving home for extended periods to learn Torah 2. Leaving home 3. Kefu Mitaso
4. Mefankei d'Ma'arava 5. What will I leave for my old age? 6. אמר להו ר׳ ינאי כפו מטתו
DAF DISCUSSIONS - KESUVOS 62

David Scop asks:

Mfankey d'maarava: Does the Gemara mean that since what they eat has kedusha because trumos, maasros has been removed, it gives those who eat the fruits more strength for tashmish - or was it simply the volume that they ate that gave them the strength?

If the 2d way is pshat, then if chas v'shalom someone in Aretz isn't a bar hachi to eat plentifully daily, is likewise their Tashmish obligation lessened?

Thank you for sending the answers to questions earlier in moed.

Bchavod ubahava,

David Scop,

The Kollel replies:

The simple explanation is clearly the second explanation above.

I would add that it was not merely the volume they ate, but also the types of food that they ate. Accordingly, I agree with your statement that if someone in Eretz Yisrael did not eat this much, he would not be obligated as much in Tashmish. This is clear from the way the Meforshim state that this obligation is based primarily on the circumstances of each individual.

All the best,

Yaakov Montrose

The Kollel adds:

See also Tosfos Shabbos 47a DH b'Glila Shanu, where Rabeinu Tam asserts that the Jews in northern Israel downed enormous amounts of wine and oil.

M. Kornfeld