Rambam discusses this exact question in a responsum (1:150 in the Machon Yerushalayim edition) to R. Pinchas the Judge. He tells R. Pinchas to read his Sefer Hamitzvot where he lays out the rule that a mitzvah that is derived via one of the 13 principles of exposition is not called d'oraita unless the Sages explicitly say so. Kessef which is derived via a ...
See the Talmud’s elaboration on 49b:
על מנת שאני עשיר אין אומרים כרבי אלעזר בן חרסום וכרבי אלעזר בן עזריה אלא כל שבני עירו מכבדים אותו מפני עושרו
‘On condition that I am wealthy,’ we do not say, like R. Eleazar b. Harsom and R. Eleazar b. Azariah, but as long as he is honoured by his fellow citizens on account of his wealth.
Ma'ayaneh Shel Torah quotes the The Chiddushei HaRIM that when Dama ben Nesina lost a huge sum of money because he was honoring his father, it created a Heavenly Accusation against the Jewish people.
By giving him a red heifer, G-d showed that while a non-Jew was willing to lose a large amount of money for a Mitzvah that makes sense, the Jews were willing ...
The footnotes in the Soncino Talmud write concerning the מדוני:
A townsman of Meron in Galilee, south of Giscala. The reading here and in the MS. F of B.B. 156b is מדוני .
Similarly, if you look in Jastrow's dictionary under מדוני, he leads you to the word מרוני, which he says there:
So a "Madonite" is someone from the town of Meron.
The edition of Shas at HebrewBooks.org contains a footnote suggesting that it is indeed R. Shimon b. Lakish.
It notes that there are manuscripts with this reading, as well as the parallel text in the Talmud Yerushalmi.
The author of בכור שור is Rabbi Alexander Sender Schor (1673-1737), author of Simlah Chadasha.
He wrote בכור שור on many masechtos of Shas, including Kiddushin. All of בכור שור may be found in this sefer; the commentary to Kiddushin starts on page 444.
I checked the first comment on דף ב, and it seems to match the commentary quoted in the ילקוט מפרשים (in ...
(If you're in a rush, skip to the last paragraph.)
Let us first compare the texts to see what the discrepancies actually are. The Talmudic passage reads as follows:
תנו רבנן כל שעסקיו עם הנשים סורו רע כגון הצורפים והסריקים והנקורות
והרוכלין והגרדיים והספרים והכובסים והגרע והבלן והבורסקי אין מעמידים
מהם לא מלך ולא כהן גדול מאי טעמא לא ...
I am reminded of an insight I heard from R' Aharon Lichtenstein zt"l.
Shaul was assigned the job of killing all of the tribe of Amaleiq. He led a war that almost did it; but he left one person -- Agag, their king -- alive. Shemuel told him that as punishment, Shaul would lose the throne; he would be a one-king "dynasty".
Rav Lichtenstein taught that it was ...
I suspect you're not aware what is involved in the sale of a daughter.
The daughter is not sold into slavery. She is essentially being given up for adoption, to use a modern parallel.
The aim of the sale is to have her marry the buyer or one of his sons.
If, by age 12, they have not gotten married, she's free and goes back home. (Though she works for a ...
The parallel Chazzal to this is found in Rus Rabba 7 11. There the Eitz Yosef explains that the function of this kinyan was actually a ruse to ensure witnesses.
He says the barrel of treats was smashed which brought all the children to come gather them. They in turn would remember what had transpired being that children have good memories, as it says ...
Hazaka only works with the original owner's consent.
Rambam, Laws of Sales Chapter 1:
א,ז [ח] כיצד בחזקה: מכר לו בית או שדה, או נתן אותן מתנה--כיון שנעל או גדר או פרץ כל שהוא, והוא שיועיל במעשיו--הרי זה קנה.
א,ח במה דברים אמורים, בשהחזיק בפני המוכר. אבל שלא בפני המוכר או הנותן, צריך
שיאמר לו לך חזק וקנה; ואחר כך אם החזיק--קנה, אף על פי שאינו ...
Yes, the money derived from the sale of Tikrovet Avoda Zara is forbidden.
Rambam AZ 7.2. Tikrovet has the same din as AZ itself. This din is extracted from the Mishna AZ dad 29b, Gemara 32b (a zevach compared to dead that is prohibited from hanaa) , as stated in the OP.
ז, ב עבודה זרה עצמה, ומשמשיה, ותקרובת שלה, וכל הנעשה בשבילה-- אסור בהנאה, שנאמר "...
The Rambam writes how the Minhag of Klal Yisrael is to use Kesef or Shaveh Kesef, not Shtar; although, shetar is also an option. Rav Hershel Schachter (Kiddushin 5777 - Pesichah) quotes Prof. Simcha Assaf (from a book he found in his father's library) who thinks this is one of the Rambam's attacks on the Karaites, emphasizing how we believe in Torah Shebaal ...
We learn the halacha about a car by first looking at the halacha by a boat.
A boat is a movable property and is acquired by:
meshicha "pulling" from a property to another
mesira "transmission of an object" in the public domain and by schirut makom (leading its place) in the domain of the seller.
In Bava Basra (75b - 77a) there is a long ...
The Gemara shortly after the one you quoted makes note that one is not obligated to actively spend money in order to fulfill their chiyuv of kibbud av v'eim, and in the event that they do, they are entitled to reimbursement. While this would seem to indicate only that he takes precedence over his parents, and not his children, there's a Gemara ...
If it is at the time of wedding, under the chupa, it's good.
Mishna in maaser sheni 4.7
היה מדבר עמה על עסקי גיטה וקדושיה ונתן לה גיטה וקדושיה ולא פרש
רבי יוסי אומר דיו, רבי יהודה אומר צריך לפרש
Bartenura שעסוקים באותו ענין ומתוך אותם הדברים עמד וגירש או קידש אין צריך לפרש, והלכה כרבי יוסי.
Gemara kiddushin 6a
אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל והוא ...
Thanks to the answer of @Joel K I searched in manuscripts of the Sifria Leumit.
See in Manuscript Vatican Apostolica Hebr 110-111 that the text is Amar leih Rabbi Shimeon Ben Lakish (Left column fourth line)
Rashi explains that the reason why one who eats outside is invalid to give testimony is because he does not care about basic dignity. This is clearly not relevant to those who eat in a place where it is quite normal to eat.
וי"ל דשמא לא נגמרה ג"ש אלא לאשמועינן מקום הנחת תפילין
After reminding us the rule of reciprocity of gezera shava (his first understanding of "there is no gezera shava for half"), Tosfot answered that Amorayim have a Kabala from Sinai that the gezera shava regards the teaching of tefilin's position only.
Now we can understand the teruts of tosfot helping ...
Disclaimer: What follows is my own interpretation that I have not seen in any commentaries, so feel free to be skeptical of it.
Summary: The difference between the question and the answer is that the question assumes we are dealing with a true gezeirah shavah, while the answer rejects that assumption.
I would suggest that Tosafos's answer is that we are not ...
Your question 2 is predicated on a reading of the word כשר as referring to proper spiritual value, and therefore middot. I do not believe that that interpretation is correct.
Here is Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn (author of the sefer Daat Torah) correctly translating the Rambam under discussion.
Rambam (Hilchos Ishus 3:19): Similarly a man should not marry of a ...
The gemara in Kiddushin 11b and 12a provides 2 additional reasons.
Reish Lakish says that we learn it from Chizkiyah, who holds the minimum sale price of an amah Ivriyah is a dinar, (because one must have option of prorating her redemption, and once we see the price must be choshuv (respectable?), we set it at a dinar). And we learn Kiddushin from from amah ...
I had proposed that, according to R' Yochanan, the Mishnah could work according to either R' Yehudah or the Chachamim.
According to R' Yehudah, the reason a Na'arah cannot accept her divorce/marriage document is because "two hands cannot accept as one." If a Na'arah has no father, perhaps he would hold that she could accept on her own behalf, as there are ...
As the gemara rules (Kiddushin 12a) that if the object isn't worth a Perutah here but is worth more than a Perutah in another place, the Kiddushin are valid.
Ebay is such "another place" where the bride can use the full worth as it is an accepted marketplace, and the prices there are valid market prices.
I'd think it would say she acquires herself through get or the husband's death.
There would be no point of writing the Mishnah this way, because it would be redundant. We already have been told that a woman becomes unmarried via a get or the death of her husband. The Mishnah is trying to tell us how status changes are effected; the status change that has ...
According to rashi in Bamidbar 19:22, in his second explanation of para aduma from rabi Moshe hadarshan, the para aduma comes to fix the mess from the eigel, just like the maidservant who cleans the mess in the palace that her child made.
Accordingly, the para aduma is representative of a good relationship between parent and child. Mr. Nesina was treated ...
This should not to be taken literally but metaphorically meaning that Onkelos' translation is considered as it were from divine origin, handed to Moses at Sinai.
See: Targum Mi'Sinai? by Rafael Binyamin Posen, available in JSTOR here.
I will tray to give a different response (see my 2 comments above). A first step is to talk about the topic with a minimum of technical terms.
A deed of acquisition is generally a symbolic act, a speaking act. When mister A acquires an object Ob. from Mister B, there is a kind of scenography: from the hand of mister B to the hand of mister A, from his ...
"that if you publicly use property long enough without anybody objecting, it's yours even if you can't show proof of a transaction."
There actually is such a concept in Halacha. It's also called "Chazaka", here in its common meaning of "legal presumption".
That is, if you can prove that you used the land for three years in a row, you do not need to prove ...