Resources for Kesubos daf 38

1.     The משנה says that according to רבי עקיבא a woman who was נתארסה and then got divorced is entitled to keep the קנס herself if she is נאנסה. However, the גמרא never mentions who gets the ממונות aspect of it. In other words, who gets her בושת ופּגם? In a typical case of a נערה any בושת ופּגם would go to the father but what about in this case? The רמב"ם  in הלכות נערה פּרק ב׳ הל׳ ט"ז says that the father still gets it. The רא"ש in סימן ה brings thisרמב"ם  and says that the reason for theרמב"ם  is that the גמרא explains that the reason a father is typically entitled to בושת ופּגם is because he could marry her off to a מנוול ומוכה שחין. That reasoning still applies here. However, the רא"ש himself disagrees and says that the daughter keeps the money. The reason is that there is a היקש of  בושת ופּגם to קנס so whoever gets one gets the other. What’s surprising is that theרמב"ם  seems to contradict himself from the הלכה right before. In הלכה ט"ו he says that if a lady was a נערה when she was נאנסה but there was no העמדה בדין until she was a בוגרת, she will keep both the קנס and בושת ופּגם herself which is understood to be because the קנס and ממונות are הוקש to each other. If so, it would be a סתירה from the הלכה of בוגרת where she keeps both to the הלכה of נארסה ונתגרשה where she only gets the קנס and not the בושת ופּגם. The אור שמח on that הלכה in theרמב"ם  answers that in the case of a woman who was נתארסה, she is still under her father’s רשות. It is just a גזרת הכתוב that for some reason she gets to keep the קנס and not her father. In that case we won’t say she also gets the בושת ופּגם as the היקש doesn’t make sense to apply to that. However, if she became a בוגרת then she is totally out of her father’s רשות. In that case it makes sense to apply the היקש to say that just as the קנס goes to her the בושת ופּגם goes to her. The אבי עזרי has aother פּשט. He says that the רמב"ם  really doesn’t hold there is a היקש at all which is why by נתארסה ונתגרשה the father keeps the בושת ופּגם even though she gets the קנס. However, when it comes to a בוגרת there is a different issue: the תורה gave a woman a קנס based on the פּסוק of ונתן לאבי הנערה. If so, he is only זוכה to it at שעת נתינה and at that point she was already a בוגרת so he won’t get it. Since the בושת ופּגם is learned from the same פּסוק it makes sense that the father would not be entitled to it until העמדה בדין either and at that point she was already a בוגרת.

2.     The גמרא asks how we know to make a גזרה שוה from אורשה, maybe we should make the גזרה שוה from the word בתולה. Some of the ראשונים here are bothered how we can suggest just making up a new גזרה שוה? Don’t we say from the גמרא in פּסחים דף ס"ו that a גזרה שוה must be a מסורה from your Rebbe and can’t be made up? The ריטב"א gives a fundamental answer: in most cases the תנאים and אמוראים didn’t have the full מסורה of exactly what word to make the גזרה שוה with. What they knew was that there was some גזרה שוה to made in this ענין and they had to use rules and סברא to decide what it was. Therefore, the גמרא will say that sometimes say a גזרה שוה needs to be “מופנה משני צדדין” or “מצד אחד” or else “למידין ומשיבין” which means if the גזרה שוה isn’t obviously open for a דרשה then we can ask questions on it and reject it since it may have not been the right word to make the דרשה from. (However, there are times when they had the actual word passed down as well such as in the case of סנהדרין דף פּ"ט ע"ב in רש"י in ד"ה ור׳ שמעון where רש"י says the word itself was part of the מסורה.)

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder

Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander

Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld - Shakla Vetarya