Mishnah 1
1)
(a)In a case where Reuven asks Shimon to betroth a woman on his behalf, and Shimon goes (ve'Halach) and betroths her himself, to whom is she betrothed?
(b)What does the word 've'Halach' imply?
(c)Why does the Mishnah then not refer to Shimon as a Shali'ach?
1)
(a)In a case where Reuven asks Shimon to betroth a woman on his behalf, and Shimon goes (ve'Halach) and betroths her himself - she is betrothed to Shimon.
(b)The word 've'Halach' implies - that he tricked Reuven in the process.
(c)And the Mishnah does not refer to Shimon as a Shali'ach - to teach us that, despite the fact that Reuven did not explicitly appoint him as a Shali'ach, he is dubbed 'a trickster' (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
2)
(a)What does the Tana say about a case where Reuven betroths a woman after thirty days, and Shimon comes and betroths her during the thirty-day period?
(b)Is he allowed to marry her before the thirty days have elapsed?
(c)What does he say about where Shimon is a Kohen and the woman, a bas Yisrael?
2)
(a)In a case where Reuven betroths a woman after thirty days, and Shimon comes and betroths her during the thirty-day period - the Mishnah rules that she is betrothed to Shimon (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)Moreover - he is allowed to marry her before the thirty days have elapsed.
(c)And if Shimon is a Kohen and the woman, a bas Yisrael - she is permitted to eat T'rumah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
3)
(a)What will be the Din if Reuven initially said ' ... from now and after thirty days', and Shimon then came and betrothed her?
(b)If Shimon had not betrothed her in the middle, what would be the Din with regard to her eating T'rumah, assuming she was ...
1. ... a bas Kohen to a Yisrael?
2. ... a bas Yisrael to a Kohen?
(c)What is the Din now that Shimon did betroth her?
(d)What must she do to get out of her predicament?
3)
(a)If Reuven initially said ' ... from now and after thirty days', and Shimon then came and betrothed her - she is Safek Mekudeshes to both of them (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)If Shimon had not betrothed her in the middle, she would be permitted to eat T'rumah if she was ...
1. ... a bas Kohen to a Yisrael bas Kohen, but forbidden, if she was ...
2. ... a bas Yisrael to a Kohen.
(c)Now that Shimon did betroth her - she is forbidden to eat T'rumah either way (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(d)To get out of her predicament - she needs to receive a Get from both Reuven and Shimon.
Mishnah 2
4)
(a)What does the Tana mean when he rules that, in a case where a man betroths a woman on condition (al M'nas) that he gives her two hundred Zuz, she is betrothed provided he gives it?
(b)On what principle is this ruling based?
(c)And what will be the Din if he says to her on condition that he ...
1. ... will give it to her within thirty days.
2. ... possesses two hundred Zuz?
(d)What if there are no witnesses that he possesses two hundred Zuz?
(e)Why is that?
4)
(a)When, in a case where a man betroths a woman on condition (al M'nas) that he gives her two hundred Zuz, the Tana rules that she is betrothed provided he gives it, he means that - the moment he gives her the money, she is betrothed retroactively ...
(b)...based on the principle - 'Kol ha'Omer al-M'nas k'Omer me'Chashav Dami' ('al-M'nas' always means 'beginning from now').
(c)And if he says to her on condition that he ...
1. ... will give it to her within thirty days - then provided he does so, she is betrothed retroactively, otherwise not (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
2. ... possesses two hundred Zuz - she is betrothed provided witnesses have seen the money ...
(d)... otherwise, she is Safek Mekudeshes ...
(e)... because we suspect that he has the money, and is trying to get her into trouble.
5)
(a)What is the difference between the previous case and one where the man stipulates that he will show her two hundred Zuz?
(b)And what does the Tana mean when he concludes that if he showed it to her on the table she is not Mekudeshes?
5)
(a)The difference between the previous case and one where he the man stipulates that he will show her two hundred Zuz is that - in the latter case, he must actually show her the money, and witnesses that he possesses it will not suffice (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)And when the Tana concludes that if he showed it to her on the table she is not Mekudeshes, he means that - he is a banker and that he showed her money that is on the counter and that is not his (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 3
6)
(a)What does the Tana say in a case where a man betroths a woman on condition that he possesses a Kur of earth, on condition that he possesses it in a specific location or on condition that he will show her a Kur of earth?
(b)What is the man mean by 'Kur of earth'?
(c)How many Sa'in is that the equivalent of?
(d)Why, if, the last case, he shows her the earth 'in the valley', is she not Mekudeshes?
(e)Will it make any difference if he is ...
1. ... on the verge of purchasing it?
2. ... a Choker or a Kablan (a resident gardener who owns a share in the produce)?
6)
(a)In a case where a man betroths a woman on condition that he possesses a Kur of earth, on condition that he possesses it in a specific location (See Tos. Yom-Tov) or on condition that he will show her a Kur of earth - the Tana issues exactly the same rulings that it issued in the previous Mishnah.
(b)By a 'Kur of earth', the man means - a plot of land large enough to plant a Kur of corn ...
(c)... which is equivalent to thirty Sa'ah.
(d)If, in the last case, he shows her the earth 'in the valley', she is not Mekudeshes - because the land does not belong to him ...
(e)... even if he is ...
1. ... on the verge of purchasing it.
2. ... a Choker or a Kablan (two kinds of resident gardeners who own a share in the produce [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).
Mishnah 4
7)
(a)What does Rebbi Meir initially learn from the P'sukim in Mas'ei "Vayomer Moshe aleihem 'Im Ya'avru B'nei Gad u'Venei Reuven ... " and "ve'Im Lo Ya'avru Chalutzim ... ' "?
(b)What are the ramifications of this ruling? What would have happened had Moshe not made a T'nai Kaful (a dual stipulation)?
(c)On what principle is this ruling based?
(d)What else, besides that the condition must precede the transaction, does Rebbi Meir learn from there?
(e)On what principle is the middle ruling based?
7)
(a)Rebbi Meir initially learns from the P'sukim in Mas'ei "Vayomer Moshe aleihem 'Im Ya'avru B'nei Gad u'Venei Reuven ... ' " and " 've'Im Lo Ya'avru Chalutzim ... ' " - that a condition is only valid if it is doubled (T'nai Kaful [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).
(b)Consequently - if it is not, the condition is void and the transaction is effective. Had Moshe not made a T'nai Kaful - the b'nei Reuven and Gad would have inherited the land of Gil'ad irrespective of whether they crossed the River Yarden or not.
(c)This ruling is based on the principle - that one cannot extrapolate a positive thing from a negative one ('mi'Chelal La'av I Atah Shome'a Hein'), and vice-versa.
(d)Besides that the condition must precede the transaction, he also learns from there that - the positive statement must precede the negative one (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(e)The middle ruling is based on the principle that - a condition cannot negate the transaction that preceded it ('Lo Asi T'nai u'Mevatel Ma'aseh').
8)
(a)With which of these rulings does Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel disagree?
(b)According to him, why did Moshe see fit to double the stipulation?
(c)On which principle is Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel's opinion based?
8)
(a)Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel disagrees - with Rebbi Meir's ruling on T'nai Kaful (exclusively [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).
(b)According to him, Moshe's stipulation needed to double the stipulation - because otherwise we would have thought that, if they failed to cross the Yarden, they would not even inherit in Eretz Cana'an (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(c)Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel's opinion is based on the principle - 'mi'Chelal La'av Atah Shome'a Hein'.
9)
(a)Like whom is the Halachah?
(b)On what condition are all three conditions not necessary?
(c)What will be the Din in this regard, concerning Gitin and Kidushin?
9)
(a)The Halachah is - like Rebbi Meir.
(b)All three conditions are not necessary however - if the condition was expressed using the Lashon 'al-M'nas'.
(c)There is no difference in this regard - between Dinei Mamonos on the one hand, and Gitin and Kidushin on the other.
Mishnah 5
Note: that the next three questions (10-12), on which the Bartenura does not comment, are based on the commentary of the Tos. Yom-Tov.
10)
(a)What does the Mishnah rule in a case where a man betroths a woman on the understanding that she is a Kohenes and she turns out to be a Leviyah or vice-versa?
(b)And what will be the Din if he took her to be wealthy and she turns out to be poor or vice-versa?
(c)What is the reason for these rulings?
(d)On which principle are they based?
10)
(a)In a case where a man betroths a woman on the understanding that she is a Kohenes and she turns out to be a Leviyah or vice-versa, or if he ...
(b)... took her to be wealthy and she turns out to be poor or vice-versa, the Mishnah rules that - she is Mekudeshes ...
(c)... since it is not she who tricked him (but he who 'tricked himself').
(d)These rulings are based on the principle - 'Devarim she'ba'Lev Einam Devarim' (A person's thoughts have no Halachic significance').
11)
(a)Why does the Tana juxtapose this Mishnah next to Rebbi Meir's requirement of T'nai Kaful?
(b)How else might we explain it (according to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel)?
11)
(a)The Tana juxtaposes this Mishnah next to Rebbi Meir's requirement of T'nai Kaful - to teach us that had he actually verbalized his thoughts, then even Rebbi Meir would concede they would be valid.
(b)Alternatively, it comes to teach us that - even though Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel does not require a T'nai Kaful, he does agree that that if the condition is not actually verbalized, we ignore it and she is Mekudeshes.
12)
(a)What does the Tana say about a man who stipulates that he will betroth a woman after either he or she has converted, or has been set free (from slavery)?
(b)He adds to the list 'after her husband, her sister or her Yevamah dies'. The author of this last case is Rebbi Akiva. What does Rebbi Akiva say?
(c)What is the Halachah?
12)
(a)The Tana rules that if a man stipulates that he will betroth a woman after either he or she has converted, or has been set free (from slavery) - she is not Mekudeshes.
(b)He adds to the list 'after her husband, her sister or her Yevamah dies'. The author of this last case is Rebbi Akiva who says that - Kidushin does not take effect on Chayvei La'avin.
(c)The Halachah is - that Kidushin does take effect on Chayvei La'avin and that consequently, in the current case, she is Mekudeshes (See Tiferes Yisrael).
13)
(a)The same ruling will apply in a case where Reuven says to Shimon that, if the latter's wife has a daughter, he will betroth her. On what condition will the Kidushin nevertheless be valid?
(b)How does the Rambam qualify this ruling?
(c)Then why did the Chachamim say that she is Mekudeshes?
13)
(a)The same ruling will apply in a case where Reuven says to Shimon that if the latter's wife has a daughter, he will betroth her. The Kidushin will be valid however - if the woman's pregnancy is noticeable.
(b)The Rambam qualifies this ruling however - by requiring him to betroth her again after the birth (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
(c)... and the Chachamim said that she is Mekudeshes - only with regard to prohibiting her from marrying somebody else.
Mishnah 6
14)
(a)If a man betroths a woman on condition that he will speak on her behalf to the local governor or do work for her like a hired worker for a day - when will she be betrothed?
(b)In the latter case - with what is he Mekadesh her?
(c)Why can he not betroth her with the payment of the work that he does for her?
(d)Based on which principle would the Kidushin be considered a loan?
14)
(a)If a man betroths a woman on condition that he will speak on her behalf to the local governor (See Tos. Yom-Tov) or work for her like a hired worker, she will be betrothed - when he fulfils his condition (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Diber alehah le'Shilton' & 'Mekudeshes').
(b)In the latter case he is Mekadesh her - with a P'rutah ...
(c)... not with the work that he does for her - because it is a loan, and we have a principle that 'One cannot betroth a woman against a loan ('ha'Mekadesh be'Milveh Einah Mekudeshes') ...
(d)... this in turn - is based on the principle 'Yeshnah li'Sechirus mi'Techilah ve'ad Sof' (the obligation to pay a hired worker begins as soon as he begins work [thereby turning each P'rutah's worth of work into to a loan] See Tos. Yom-Tov).
15)
(a)And what if he betroths her on condition that his father ...
1. ... agrees?
2. ... agrees within thirty days?
(b)What, in the latter case, if ...
1. ... his father dies within thirty days?
2. ... the man himself dies within thirty days?
(c)What is the reason for the latter ruling?
15)
(a)If he betroths her on condition that his father ...
1. ... agrees - then she is betrothed immediately, provided his father does not object ...
2. ... does not object within thirty days - she is Mekudeshes immediately, provided his father does not object within thirty days.
(b)In the latter case, if ...
1. ... his father dies within thirty days - she is betrothed.
2. ... the man himself dies within thirty days - we ask his father to object ...
(c)... to prevent the woman from being forced to perform Yibum.
Mishnah 7
16)
(a)What is the Din in a case where a man who states that he betrothed his daughter to someone but does not remember to whom, and ...
1. ... one man claims that he is the Chasan?
2. ... two men claim to be the Chasan? What two options do they have?
16)
(a)If a man states that he betrothed his daughter to someone but does not remember to whom, and ...
1. ... one man claims that he is the Chasan - he is believed (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
2. ... two men claim to be the Chasan - then either both of them give her a Get or one of them does, in which case the second man may marry her.
Mishnah 8
17)
(a)From which Pasuk in Ki Seitzei (in connection with a man who claims that his newly-married wife committed adultery during the engagement) do we learn that a father who states that he betrothed his daughter who is a Ketanah (See Tos. Yom-Tov) to someone, he is believed?
(b)What will the Din therefore be if he declares 'es Biti Nasati ...
1. ... le'Ish'?
2. ... la'Ish ha'Zeh'?
(c)What distinction does the Tana draw between a father who claims when his daughter is still a Ketanah that he betrothed her to a man and accepted her Get when she was a Ketanah, and where he makes the claim when she is a Gedolah?
17)
(a)We learn that a father is believed if he states that he betrothed his daughter who is a Ketanah (See Tos. Yom-Tov) to someone from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei (in connection with a man who claims that his newly-married wife committed adultery during the engagement) - "es Biti Nasati la'Ish ha'Zeh".
(b)Consequently, if he declares 'es Biti Nasati ...
1. ... le'Ish' - she is forbidden to the whole world.
2. ... la'Ish ha'Zeh' - she is permitted to marry that man.
(c)The Tana rules that if a father claims, when his daughter is still a Ketanah (See Tos. Yom-Tov), that he betrothed her to a man and accepted her Get when she was a Ketanah - he is believed, whereas if he makes the same claim when she is a Gedolah - he is not.
18)
(a)What are the Halachic ramifications of a case where two witnesses testify that a woman was captured?
(b)Why is a father who claims that his daughter was captured and that he redeemed her not believed, even if she is still Ketanah?
18)
(a)If two witnesses testify that a woman was captured -she is disqualified from marrying a Kohen.
(b)A father who claims that his daughter was captured and that he redeemed her is not believed even if she is still Ketanah - because the Torah believes him with regard to Kidushin exclusively, and not regarding any other area of Halachah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
19)
(a)What are the ramifications of the Mishnah's ruling that a man on his deathbed (See Tos. Yom-Tov) is believed if he declares that he has children (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?
(b)What if he claims that he has brothers?
(c)Why is that?
19)
(a)The ramifications of the Mishnah's ruling that a man on his deathbed (See Tos. Yom-Tov) is believed if he declares that he has children (See Tos. Yom-Tov) are - that he is believed to exempt her from Yibum.
(b)If however, he claims that he has brothers - h is not believed ...
(c)... since this negates the Chazakah that she is Patur from Yibum (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
20)
(a)What does the Tana say about a man with many daughters who betroths 'his daughter' without specifying which one?
(b)Seeing as a man has no mandate to betroth his daughter if she is a Bogeres, why would we even have thought that they are included?
(c)Then why aren't they?
20)
(a)The Tana rules that if a man with many daughters betroths 'his daughter' without specifying which one - all of the Ne'aros and the Ketanos (See Tos. Yom-Tov) are forbidden to marry - but not the Bogros.
(b)Despite the fact that a man has no mandate to betroth his daughter who is a Bogeres, we would nevertheless have thought that they are included - in a case where they appointed him a Shali'ach to make them a Shiduch ...
(c)... and the reason that they are not included is - because a man would not leave a Mitzvah which he is obligated to observe (to marry off his daughter who is a Ketanah or a Na'arah), and perform one which he is not (to marry off one who is a Bogeres).
Mishnah 9
21)
(a)The Mishnah now discusses the case of a man who has two sets of daughters from each of two wives (See Tos. Yom-Tov) and declares that he was Mekadesh his eldest daughter but cannot remember which one (See Tos. Yom-Tov). Which daughter might he have betrothed, besides the oldest of the first set or the oldest of the second set?
(b)What does Rebbi Meir rule in such a case? Which of his daughters is permitted to marry without a Get?
(c)What does Rebbi Yossi say?
(d)Why is that (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?
21)
(a)The Mishnah now discusses the case of a man who has two sets of daughters from each of two wives (See Tos. Yom-Tov) and declares that he was Mekadesh his eldest daughter but cannot remember which one (See Tos. Yom-Tov). Besides the oldest of the first set or the oldest of the second set, he might also have betrothed - the youngest of the first set (who is older than the oldest of the second set).
(b)Rebbi Meir rules in such a case that - the only daughter who is allowed to get married without a Get is - the youngest of the second set (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(c)According to Rebbi Yossi - they are all permitted except for the oldest of the first set ...
(d)... because a person tends not to enter into a Safek of this nature, so when he specifies 'the oldest daughter', he means exactly what he says (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
22)
(a)In the reverse case, where the father declares that he was Mekadesh the youngest of his daughters but cannot remember which one, what do Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yossi, respectively, rule?
(b)Why do they see fit to argue in both cases? What would we have thought ...
1. ... Rebbi Meir holds by 'Ketanos' had they argued only by 'Gedolos'?
2. ... Rebbi Yossi holds by 'Gedolos', had they argued only by 'Ketanos'?
(c)Like whom is the Halachah in both cases?
22)
(a)In the reverse case, where the father declares that he was Mekadesh the youngest of his daughters but cannot remember which one, Rebbi Meir holds - that they are all forbidden to get married except for the oldest of the first set, whereas according to Rebbi Yossi - they are all permitted, except for the youngest of the second set.
(b)They see fit to argue in both cases, because had they argued only by ...
1. ... 'Gedolos', we would have thought that by Ketanos, Rebbi Meir will concede that it is only the very youngest that he refers to as 'my youngest daughter' (unlike by Gedolos, he revels in calling them all 'big').
2. ... 'Ketanos', we would have thought that, for the same reason, Rebbi Yossi will concede that by 'Gedolos', he had any one of the three aforementioned daughters in mind.
(c)The Halachah is - like Rebbi Yossi in both cases.
Mishnah 10
23)
(a)What does the Mishnah say about a case where ...
1. ... Rachel denies Reuven's claim that he betrothed her (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?
2. ... Reuven denies Rachel's claim that he betrothed her?
(b)The Tana discusses a case where Reuven claims that he betrothed Rachel, who counters that it was her daughter that he betrothed. What does he say about ...
1. ... Reuven?
2. ... Rachel?
3. ... Rachel's daughter?
23)
(a)The Mishnah rules in a case where ...
1. ... Rachel denies Reuven's claim that he betrothed her (See Tos. Yom-Tov)- that - whereas he is forbidden to marry any of her relatives (See Tos. Yom-Tov), she is permitted to marry any of his.
2. ... Reuven denies Rachel's claim that he betrothed her that - whereas she is forbidden to marry any of his relatives, he is permitted to marry any of her's.
(b)In a case where Reuven claims that he betrothed Rachel, who counters that it was her daughter that he betrothed, the Tana rules that ...
1. ... Reuven - is forbidden to marry Rachel's relatives ...
2. ... Rachel - is permitted to marry his and so is ...
3. ... Rachel's daughter.
Mishnah 11
24)
(a)The Tana now discusses the reverse case, where Reuven claims that he betrothed Rachel's daughter, whereas Rachel counters that it was her that he betrothed. What does he say about ...
1. ... Reuven?
2. ... Rachel's daughter?
3. ... Rachel?
(b)Why does the Mishnah deem it necessary to add this set of Halachos?
(c)What will be the Din in those cases where Rachel claims that Reuven betrothed her and he denies it?
(d)What if he gives her a Get of his own accord?
24)
(a)In the reverse case, where Reuven claims that he betrothed Rachel's daughter (See Tos. Yom-Tov), whereas Rachel counters that it was her that he betrothed. The Tana rules that ...
1. ... Reuven - is permitted to marry Rachel's relatives, but forbidden to marry the daughter's relatives, whereas ...
2. ... the daughter is allowed to marry his.
3. ... Rachel - is forbidden to marry his relatives.
(b)The Mishnah adds this set of Halachos (not because it is necessary, but) - to balance the previous set.
(c)In those cases where Rachel claims that Reuven betrothed her and he denies it - we ask him (See Tos. Yom-Tov) to give her a Get (though there is no obligation on his part to do so).
(d)If he gives her a Get of his own accord - he becomes obligated to pay her Kesubah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 12
25)
(a)What examples does the Mishnah give of cases where there is Kidushin and no Aveirah?
(b)What does the Tana say about it?
(c)Despite the wording of the Mishnah 'Kol Makom', what is the one exception to the rule? What is the case where there is no Aveirah, yet the baby does not go after the father?
(d)Based on which principle is a Ger permitted to marry a Mamzeres?
25)
(a)The examples the Mishnah give of cases where there is Kidushin and no Aveirah are - a Kohenes, a Leviyah or a Yisre'eilis who marries a Kohen, a Levi or a Yisrael (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)The Tana rules that - the baby goes after the father.
(c)Despite the wording of the Mishnah 'Kol Makom', the one exception to the rule, where there is no Aveirah, is - a Ger who marries a Mamzeres, where the baby is a Mamzer.
(d)A Ger is permitted to marry a Mamzeres baseed on the principle - 'K'hal Geirim Lo Ikri Kahal' (and it is into the K'hal Hash-m that a Mamzer is forbidden to enter).
26)
(a)What is the status of a baby that is born to a couple where Kidushin is effective but where there is an Aveirah?
(b)If an example of this by a Yisrael is a Nasin or a Mamzer who marries a Yisrael or vice-versa, what are examples regarding Isur Kehunah?
26)
(a)A baby that is born to a couple where Kidushin is effective but where there is an Aveirah - goes after the one that is Pagum (Pasul).
(b)An example of this by a Yisrael is a Nasin or a Mamzer who marries a Yisrael, or vice-versa, by Isurei Kohen - an Almanah who marries a Kohen Gadol or a divorcee or a Chalutzah who marries a Kohen Hedyot (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
27)
(a)Based on which principle does a baby have the status of a Mamzer?
(b)What group of people does this cover?
(c)How do we learn this from the juxtaposition of the Pasuk "Lo Yikach Ish es Eishes Aviv" to that of "Lo Yavo Mamzer bi'Kehal Hash-m"? What is the first Pasuk referring to?
27)
(a)A baby has the status of a Mamzer - whenever Kidushin does not take effect between the baby's mother and his father, but would take effect with another man ...
(b)... with reference to a man who has a child from any one of the Arayos in the Torah (for which one is Chayav Kareis).
(c)We learn this from the juxtaposition of the Pasuk "Lo Yikach Ish es Eishes Aviv" to that of "Lo Yavo Mamzer bi'Kehal Hash-m" - since the first Pasuk is referring to his father's Shomeres Yavam (the wife of his father's brother), which is a Chiyuv Kareis.
28)
(a)When does the baby go after the mother?
(b)What is the case?
(c)What do we learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... in Mishpatim (in connection with a Shifchah Cana'anis and an Eved Ivri) "ha'Ishah vi'Yeladehah Tih'yeh la'Adonehah"?
2. ... in Va'eschanan "Ki Yasir es Bincha me'Acharai"?
(d)How do we learn the latter ruling from the fact that the Torah writes "Ki Yasir ... " and not ki Tasir"?
28)
(a)The baby goes after the mother- whenever she is not subject to Kidushin, irrespective of whether it is with the baby's father or whether it is with another man.
(b)The case is - where the mother is either a Shifchah or a Nochris.
(c)We learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... in Mishpatim (in connection with a Shifchah Cana'anis and an Eved Ivri) "ha'Ishah vi'Yeladehah Tih'yeh la'Adonehah" that - the baby of a Shifchah Cana'anis goes after her (See also Tos. Yom-Tov).
2. ... in Va'eschanan "Ki Yasir es Bincha me'Acharai" that - the baby of a Nochris goes after her.
(d)We learn the latter ruling from the fact that the Torah writes "Ki Yasir ... " and not ki Tasir" - (which would refer to the Nochri wife of a Yisrael), because it indicates that the Torah is only concerned about one's Nochri son-in-law influencing one's grandchildren, but not about one's Nochri daughter-in-law doing so (since her babies are Nochrim [See also Tos. Yom-Tov]).
Mishnah 13
29)
(a)What does Rebbi Tarfon mean when he declares that Mamzerim can become Tahor?
(b)How is this possible?
(c)Is this permitted?
(d)On what grounds does Rebbi Tarfon concede that the baby of an Eved and a Mamzeres is a Mamzer?
29)
(a)When Rebbi Tarfon declares that Mamzerim can become Tahor, he means that - (although generally, the baby of a Mamzer is a Mamzer), this baby is Kasher.
(b)This is possible - where a Mamzer 'marries' a Shifchah ...
(c)... and it is permitted even Lechatchilah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(d)Rebbi Tarfon concedes that the baby of an Eved and a Mamzeres is a Mamzer - - because an Eved has no Yichus.
30)
(a)What does Rebbi Eliezer say regarding Rebbi Tarfon's initial ruling?
(b)Like whom is the Halachah?
30)
(a)Regarding Rebbi Tarfon's initial ruling, Rebbi Eliezer holds that - the baby is an Eved Mamzer (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)The Halachah is - like Rebbi Tarfon.
