The Eddie B. Sit Edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, Perek HaCholes, has been dedicated and sponsored by our dear friend Mr. Isaac Jamal and his wife in honor of his family and for success and prosperity in all his endeavors. May he merit to raise his children in the ways of the Torah, and may they bring him much nachat. He should be blessed with health and happiness, favor and kindness in the eyes of God and man, and he should have blessings in all aspects of life, him and his entire family. Amen. Today’s daf is being studied for the elevation of the soul of Avraham ben Esther. May the spirit of God rest upon him in Gan Eden, Amen. Today’s daf is also being studied for the complete healing of Sarah bat Rachel. Please, God, heal her and all our brethren, the children of Israel. May it be Your will, and we say Amen. We begin today’s daf on Kuf Yud Gimmel Amud Rishon and start on the second line.
The Gemara begins with a question: What is the reason that a chereshet does not eat terumah? If a kohen is married to a chereshet, he typically feeds his wife terumah. However, if his wife is a chereshet, the Gemara states that she does not eat terumah. How do we know this? The answer is found in a Mishnah: Rabbi Yochanan ben Gudgada testified about a chereshet who was married off by her father, that she can receive a get. The logic is that since her father married her off, it constitutes a valid kiddushin d'oraita. Even if her father passes away and cannot receive the get, she can still receive it herself. This is the ruling of the Mishnah regarding the ability of a chereshet to receive her own get.
Rashi explains that this refers to a chereshet who was married off by her father when she was a katana, and she can receive her get even after she matures into a gedola. The Mishnah continues with another ruling: if a katana bat Yisrael is married to a kohen, she can eat terumah, while a chereshet cannot. This indicates that a katana married to a kohen is permitted to eat terumah, while a chereshet married to a kohen is not. The Gemara now seeks to understand why a katana can eat terumah while a chereshet cannot.
The Gemara proposes a concern: there is a decree that a cheresh might feed a chereshet. Rashi elaborates on the case of a katana who is a yetoma married off by her mother, allowing her to eat terumah even though her marriage is not a full marriage. The Gemara questions why a chereshet married to a kohen cannot eat terumah, even if the marriage is only rabbinical. The Gemara responds that we are worried that a cheresh married to a pikeach might feed her. The concern is that if a chereshet married to a pikeach can eat, then a cheresh married to a chereshet could also eat, leading to confusion.
However, the Gemara challenges this reasoning. Why should a chereshet married to a cheresh not be allowed to eat terumah? It is permissible for a katana to eat nevelot, even though it is a prohibition d'oraita. Therefore, the Gemara returns to its original question of why a chereshet married to a pikeach cannot eat terumah, even if the marriage is rabbinical.
The Gemara explains that the decree is due to the potential that the cheresh married to a pikeach might eat terumah d'oraita. To summarize, the ruling is that a chereshet cannot eat terumah even in a rabbinical marriage, as the concern is that it might lead to the case of a cheresh married to a pikeach eating terumah d'oraita. The discussion continues with the next ruling in the Mishnah regarding a katana who does receive a kesubah if she gets divorced, while a chereshet does not.
The Gemara questions why a katana receives a kesubah while a chereshet does not. The answer is that if a chereshet were to receive a kesubah, it would deter men from marrying her. In contrast, a katana is not deterred from marriage as she will eventually mature and gain da'as. Therefore, the lack of a kesubah for a chereshet serves as an incentive for men to marry her.
The Gemara continues to discuss the basis for a katana receiving a kesubah, referencing a Mishnah that states that a mema'enes, a girl who refuses her husband, does not receive a kesubah. The reasoning is that she is the one who initiates the separation, thus losing her claim to a kesubah. The Gemara concludes that a katana does indeed receive a kesubah, as indicated by the fact that if a get is given, she would receive it.
Now, the Gemara turns to the case of a chereshet and questions how it is determined that she does not receive a kesubah. The Gemara cites a baraita discussing a cheresh and shoteh who marry pikechot. Even if the cheresh becomes a pikeach, there is no claim against him regarding a kesubah. This is because their marriage was only rabbinical due to their lack of da'as at the time of marriage.
However, if a pikeach marries a chereshet or shoteh, even if he writes her a large kesubah, it is still valid. This implies that the pikeach willingly obligates himself, and thus the kesubah stands. The Gemara further explores whether a pikeach should also provide a kesubah to a cheresh, as this would incentivize the pikech to marry her. The Gemara concludes that more than a man wants to marry, a woman desires to be married, so there is no need for a kesubah to incentivize her.
The discussion continues, and the Gemara recounts a story about a cheresh who lived near Rav Malkiyu. He was married off to a woman and wrote her a substantial kesubah. Rav Malkiyu is praised for this decision as it provides a dual benefit of a wife and servant. The Gemara notes that this arrangement is not a mandatory kesubah but rather an allocation by the Beit Din to facilitate the marriage.
Next, the Gemara discusses the wife of a cheresh and whether she is subject to an asham talui if a man engages with her. The ruling is that there is no asham talui because the marriage is not considered valid due to the cheresh's lack of da'as. The Gemara explains that if a cheresh takes terumah, it is not even a safek terumah, as he has no valid da'as.
The Gemara then questions the implications of this ruling and discusses whether a cheresh should be liable for an asham talui concerning his wife. The discussion leads to an analysis of the nature of a cheresh's da'as, whether it is weak or completely absent. The Gemara concludes that a cheresh has a status of safek, and therefore a woman married to a cheresh does not have the same standing as a woman married to a pikeach.
In summary, the Gemara clarifies the distinctions between the statuses of a cheresh and a chereshet, particularly regarding their ability to receive a get and the implications of their marriages. The final conclusion is that a chereshet can receive a get, while a cheresh cannot issue one, highlighting the importance of da'as in these halachic matters. Baruch Hashem l'olam, Amen and Amen.