The LB Sit Edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, Masechet Kiddushin, has been sponsored by our good friend Mr. Chaimy Dana, sheyishmerehu veyichayehu, in honor of his wife Bina bat Rivka, for many years of shalom bayit, Masechet Kiddushin, and hatzlacha, parnasa, and all good things, health, happiness, nachat from the children, and all the berachot, amen. Today's daf is being studied le'iluy nishmat Rabbi Avraham ben Esther, Boaz ben Yosef v'Sarah, Miriam bat Genia, Tiffa bat Sarah, ruach Hashem tenichem b'gan eden, amen. Additionally, today's daf is being studied for the refuah sheleima of Moshe ben Dina, Sarah Ruchama bat Rachel, and Sarah bat Rachel, refuah sheleima, refuat hanefesh u'refuat haguf, b'karov b'toch shear cholei Yisrael, v'nomar amen.
We begin today's daf on Daf Bet Amud Bet, starting four lines from the bottom. The Gemara continues, ve'hadtnan, we learned in the Mishna, b'shivah derachim bodkim et hazav. We stated that in seven ways we check the zav, which we learned on the previous daf, that a male with zavut is not always tamei. For example, if it comes machmat ones. Ones would be, for example, if he ate or drank something that brings about the zavut. If he jumped, saw something, experienced a hirhur, or carried something very heavy, we said there are seven ways to investigate the zav to determine the cause. If it resulted from an external factor, then the zavut is not considered a zavut, and he is tahor.
In the previous Gemara, we analyzed why the word devarim was not used in discussing the seven ways to check the zav. The Gemara wants to know why, when discussing the seven ways of checking the zav, it did not say devarim. The term derech was used by Kiddushin, ha'ishah niknit b'shalosh derachim, because derech is a reference to bi'ah, as the pasuk refers to bi'ah as a derech. The other two items also lead to bi'ah, kesef and shtar, thus making derech a fitting terminology in Kiddushin.
We stated that according to our Mishna, it follows the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who said that derech ha'olam means that a man goes and searches for the lady, as it is his object that was lost. Adam had his rib taken away, and that is how Chavah was created; he is searching for the missing aveidah. Therefore, when it says b'shalosh derachim, it means derech eretz, the normal way of the world, which is that a man is doing the searching. Based on these two ramifications, why would it say the word derachim by zav? It seems that it does not have those two issues, so it should revert to the standard word of devarim.
The Gemara responds that ve'hadtnan b'shivah derachim bodkim et hazav, let it say devarim. No, it is coming to tell you also a derech, as a person who eats excessively leads to zavut, and when a person drinks excessively, it also brings about zavut. Hence, the term derech is appropriate here as well.
The Gemara continues with another Mishna, etrog shaveh le'ilan b'gimmel derachim. The Gemara here discusses an etrog that is similar to a tree concerning three halachot. What are these three halachot? Rashi explains that b'gimmel derachim refers to orlah, revai, and shemittah. We know that a fruit tree is considered orlah for the first three years, and an etrog tree has the same law. In the fourth year, the fruit is kodesh, and one must bring the fruit to the Temple. The third item is regarding shemittah; the judgment for fruit is based on when it budded, not when it was picked. This is a significant distinction, as one might think that if an etrog budded in the seventh year but was picked in the eighth year, it would not be considered a shemittah etrog. However, since it budded in the seventh year, it is indeed a shemittah etrog.
The Mishna states that etrog is similar to a tree in three ways. The Gemara asks why it uses the term derachim here instead of devarim. The Gemara explains that we need the word derech for the seifa of that Mishna, which states that it is similar to a vegetable in one way. Rashi elaborates that during the years of shemittah, different cycles determine which ma'asrot are given. In the first, second, fourth, and fifth years, one gives ma'aser rishon and ma'aser sheni. In the third and sixth years, one gives ma'aser rishon and ma'aser ani.
Now, the question arises regarding what determines the year of the fruit concerning ma'aser. When it comes to vegetables, Rashi states that the year it is picked is the year of the ma'aser. If it was picked in the third year, it becomes ma'aser ani, even if it grew in the second year. Conversely, if it grew during the entire third year but was not picked until the fourth year, it would be ma'aser sheni. An etrog is similar to a vegetable in that its ma'aser is determined by the time of picking, unlike other trees where it is determined by when it budded.
The Gemara then returns to the question of why it uses the term derech instead of devarim. The response is that it is necessary for the seifa of the Mishna, which states that it is similar to a vegetable in one way. The Gemara further clarifies that the word derech is used to indicate that the way of an etrog is similar to a vegetable in its properties. This similarity is that vegetables need a lot of water and are not solely dependent on rainwater; they require irrigation as well. Therefore, the derech of an etrog is like a vegetable in that it needs sufficient water.
The Gemara continues with a discussion about a koy, an animal with uncertain classification. The Mishna states that the koy has characteristics that are similar to both a chaya and a behemah, but there are also characteristics that do not fit either classification. The Gemara inquires why it uses the term derech instead of devarim. The conclusion is that whenever there is a dispute or uncertainty, the term derech is appropriate, while devarim is used when there is clarity.
In the Mishna, we also learn about the similarities between gittin and shichrurei avadim. The Gemara asks why it uses the term derech in this context. The response is that when there is a dispute, the term derech is fitting. The Gemara explains that this distinction is important because it shows the differences in how various cases are treated.
The discussion continues with the analysis of the three kinyanim in Kiddushin: kesef, shtar, and bi'ah. The Gemara asks how we know that a woman can be acquired through kesef. The answer is derived from the Mishna in Masechet Ketubot, which states that a father has the right to marry off his daughter and keep the money from the Kiddushin. The Gemara questions how we can be sure that the father keeps the money and how we know that kesef is a valid means of acquisition.
The Gemara provides a source for the father keeping the money from the verse about an amah ivriya, indicating that once she becomes a na'arah, there is no compensation for the master. The Gemara concludes that since the father is the one who marries off the daughter, he is entitled to the money from the Kiddushin.
This analysis leads to further questions about the rights of a father with respect to his daughter, particularly when she is a na'arah. The Gemara explores various scenarios and interpretations, ultimately reinforcing the father's rights over the money from Kiddushin as well as the authority to marry his daughter.
In conclusion, the discussion on the various aspects of Kiddushin, the distinctions in classifications, and the rights of fathers in these matters highlights the complexity and depth of the halachic principles involved. Each ruling and distinction plays a critical role in understanding the broader implications of marriage and family law within Jewish tradition.