קידושין דף ב ע"ב

Alternatively: (Yirmiyahu 32:44) Fields will be acquired for money — so it taught the woman is acquired.^[1]

Then let it teach there: the man acquires!

At first it uses the language of the Torah, and in the end it uses the language of the Rabbis.

And what is the language of the Rabbis?

That he forbids her to everyone, like hekdesh.^[2]

Then let it teach here: the man acquires!

וניתני הכא האיש קונה - just as it teaches in the Rabbis' language, the man betroths.

Because it wants to teach in the latter clause and she acquires herself — about her, it also taught the first clause about her.

Then let it teach: the man acquires and transfers!

וניתני - here: the man acquires in three ways.

ומקנה - her to herself, in two ways. And it answers: because among those two ways there is the death of the husband.

Because there is the death of the husband, where it is not he who transfers her; it is from Heaven that she is transferred.

And if you wish, say: had it taught acquires, I would have said even against her will; so it taught the woman is acquired — with her consent, yes; without her consent, no.

And why does it say shalosh (three, feminine)? Let it say sheloshah!

Because it wants to teach derech (way), and derech is feminine, as it is written (Shemos 18:20) And you shall make known to them the way in which they shall walk.

But then, what was taught: In seven ways (be-shivah, masculine) the zav is examined — let it say sheva, since it wants to teach derech!^[3]

בודקים את הזב - in eating and in drinking, in illness, in carrying a load, in jumping, in sight, and in thought — perhaps he saw it because of one of these, and he was compelled and is tahor; for the Torah says from his flesh (Vayikra 15:2) — of itself, and not through compulsion. But a woman becomes tamei even through compulsion, as it says in the perek Bnos Kusim (Niddah 36b): when it says, when her blood flows, compulsion is included.

And we have found derech called masculine, as it is written (Devarim 28:7) They will go out against you one way, and flee before you seven ways.

If so, the verses contradict each other, and the Mishnayos too contradict each other!

The verses do not contradict each other: here it speaks of Torah, and Torah is called feminine, as it is written (Tehillim 19:8) The Torah of Hashem is perfect, restoring the soul — it wrote it in the feminine;

there it speaks of war, for it is the way of a man to make war, and it is not the way of a woman to make war — it wrote it in the masculine.

The Mishnayos do not contradict each other: here it concerns a woman — it teaches it in the feminine;

there it concerns a man, for it is the way of a man to be examined, and it is not the way of a woman to be examined, since a woman becomes tamei even through compulsion — it teaches the masculine.

What is the reason it says shalosh? Because of ways? Let it say devarim (things) and let it say sheloshah!

ופרכינן מ"ט תני שלוש - you say it is because of the word ways.

ליתני דברים וניתני שלושה - as is the way of the Gemara.

Because it wants to teach intercourse, and intercourse is called derech, as it is written (Mishlei 30:19–20) And the way of a man with a maiden; so is the way of an adulterous woman.

That works for intercourse; but money and document — what is there to say?

Because of intercourse.

And does it teach two on account of one?

ותני תרתי משום חדא - in astonishment: did it change the wording of money and document on account of intercourse? It should have followed the majority.

These too are a preparation for intercourse.

And if you wish, say: Whose view is this? It is Rabbi Shimon, as it was taught: Rabbi Shimon says: Why did the Torah say (Devarim 22:13) If a man takes a wife, and did not write, if a woman is taken by a man? Because it is the way of a man to go in search of a woman, and it is not the way of a woman to go in search of a man.

הא מני - that it uses the word way for betrothing a woman — it is Rabbi Shimon, who says that the way of the world applies to them.

A parable: a person who lost something — who searches for whom? The owner of the lost object searches for his lost object.

אבידה - one of his ribs.

And what we learned: In seven ways the zav is examined — let it say devarim!

There it teaches us this: that the way of excess eating brings to zivah, and the way of excess drinking brings to zivah.

And what we learned: An esrog is like a tree in three ways — let it say devarim!

בג' דרכים - orlah and revai apply to it as to a tree, and regarding Sheviis one goes by the budding of its fruit, as with a tree, and not by the picking, as with a vegetable.

Because it needs to teach the latter clause: and like a vegetable in one way.

ולירק בדרך אחד - for at the time of its picking is its tithing: one does not go by its budding for the tithes, as with other trees, but by the year in which it was picked, as with a vegetable, as the Gemara explains the reason further on. The tithes change in the order of the years: in the first year of the Shemitah cycle, maaser rishon and maaser sheni, and likewise in the second; but in the third, maaser rishon and maaser ani. And if it budded in the second and was picked in the third — with other trees one goes by the budding, and with an esrog by the picking, as with a vegetable.

Let it also say in the latter clause: one thing^[4]

Tosafos

אי נמי שדות בכסף יקנו - And the reason it does not bring the acquisition written in the Torah, from the money of his purchase (Vayikra 25:51), is that it wants to bring the acquisition of a field. And it is difficult: if so, it should have brought the field which Avraham acquired! One can answer: from that one cannot infer, for one can say that the field which Avraham acquired was by chazakah or by document, since it is not written: the field which he acquired for money.

דאסר לה אכ"ע כהקדש - And behold, you are mekudeshes to me means: to be sanctified to me forever, for me — like (Nedarim 48a) behold they are sanctified to Heaven, to be for Heaven. And the plain sense is: mekudeshes to me — designated for me and prepared for me. But if he were to say: this tallis is mekudash to me, it does not seem that it would work; for regarding a woman, in that she is designated to be his she is forbidden to all, but with a loaf or a tallis one cannot say this.

אי תנא קונה ה"א בע"כ - And although it teaches the man betroths, which implies against her will — that is because it already taught us here that against her will, no. And that it teaches the yevamah is acquired and does not teach the yavam acquires against her will — since it taught the woman is acquired, it also taught in the latter clause the yevamah is acquired; for is acquired implies with her consent and implies against her will.

ליתני שלשה - Explanation: because the whole Torah is said in the masculine.

קשו קראי אהדדי - Although we find several things called both masculine and feminine, as it is written (Yechezkel 2:9) a hand sent forth to me, and in it a scroll of a book, and likewise the sun had set (Bereishis 15:17), the sun rose (ibid. 19:23), to the one camp and strikes it (ibid. 32:9); and likewise in the language of the Sages we find (Shabbos 21b) regarding a lamp, if it went out, one need not attend to it, a lamp that went out (ibid. 44a), your donkey has gone, Tarfon (Sanhedrin 33a), one who rents a donkey and it went blind, and led it on a mountain (Bava Metzia 78a), the owner of the cow did not manage to pull the donkey before the donkey died (Kesubos 76a), and many like these — nevertheless, wherever one can answer, we answer; and in the verses too there is some exposition. Alternatively: since he saw that the Mishnayos changed their wording, following the two verses, he wanted to give a reason and a precise reading for them.

הכא דבתורה קאי ותורה איקרי לשון נקבה - And if you will say: war too is called feminine, as it is written (Shmuel I 31:3) and the war went heavily against Shaul, and the war continued (ibid. 19:8); and further, just as it says it is the way of a man to make war and not a woman, so too it is the way of a man to learn Torah and not a woman! One can answer: it is not comparable, for here it speaks of the Torah itself, which the verse calls by the word way, and not of those who learn it; whereas they will go out against you (Devarim 28:7) refers to the men of war, and they are the men whose way it is to make war.

[מפני מה אמרה תורה כי יקח וכו' - Explanation: for it implies against her will, and it did not write, if she is taken, which implies with her consent. Tosfos Yeshanim.]

אתרוג שוה לאילן בג' דרכים - Rashi explains: for orlah, revai and Sheviis — for regarding Sheviis one goes by the budding of its fruit, as with a tree, and not by the picking, as with a vegetable. And if you will say: now that it implies that revai applies to an esrog, it is difficult from here for the one who teaches kerem revai, at the beginning of perek Keitzad Mevarchin (Berachos 35a), which implies that revai does not apply to other trees. One can answer that he means this: kerem revai wherever it can be taught; and where it cannot be taught they do not disagree with him; for they do not disagree there to say that no Tanna holds neta revai — perhaps apart from that case of the esrog there is an explicit dispute of Tannaim somewhere — and they disagreed only over the unattributed Mishnayos at the end of Maaser Sheni and elsewhere: whether according to the one who holds (Berachos 35a) neta revai or according to the one who holds (ibid.) kerem revai, to know which way the halachah goes. And some explain: even the one who teaches kerem revai agrees that for other trees it applies by Rabbinic law, and here it speaks of Rabbinic law. And there is a practical difference in this: if they disagree, so that the one who teaches kerem revai means specifically that, but for other plantings there is no revai at all, not even Rabbinically — and they said (Shabbos 139a) whoever is lenient in the Land, the halachah follows him outside the Land — then nowadays outside the Land the law of revai does not apply to trees; but if it is Rabbinic, all agree that it applies to other trees, and the same holds outside the Land, that revai applies Rabbinically. And what Rashi explains — that for Sheviis we go by the budding, as with a tree, and not by the picking, as with a vegetable — implies from his explanation that for a vegetable we go by the picking regarding Sheviis. But he was not precise, for in tractate Sheviis (9:1) we learned: all aftergrowths are permitted, except aftergrowths of cabbage; and Rabbeinu Nissim asked that in perek Makom Shenahagu (Pesachim 51b) it teaches the reverse! And he answered: the one in tractate Sheviis, which teaches that all aftergrowths are permitted, speaks of aftergrowths of the eve of Sheviis that entered Sheviis: since most of their growth was in the sixth year they are like the sixth year and permitted even for trade, except aftergrowths of cabbage, which are forbidden for trade like the law of Sheviis, or after the removal for eating, as the Yerushalmi explains: with any vegetable you can tell whether it is new or old, but aftergrowths of cabbage, whose way is to grow stalk upon stalk, have leaves that grow in Sheviis, and perhaps he will take of the leaves, which are forbidden, and say: I took of the stalks. And the one of Makom Shenahagu (ibid.), which teaches that all aftergrowths are forbidden, speaks of aftergrowths that grew in Sheviis, and according to Rabbi Akiva, who expounds: and since it was not sown, from where would they gather? Rather, it teaches that aftergrowths are forbidden even for eating, and all the more for trade; and he holds that aftergrowths are forbidden in Sheviis by Torah law, even before the time of removal, and once the year after Sheviis comes they are forbidden Rabbinically for the time it takes to grow their like; and he holds that all other aftergrowths are forbidden in the year after Sheviis, but aftergrowths of cabbage, which have no like among the vegetables of the field, we do not forbid on account of other aftergrowths, for the matter is recognizable: what grew as stalks is of Sheviis and forbidden, and what had not reached that is of the year after Sheviis and permitted; and one who sees a person eating aftergrowths of cabbage in the year after Sheviis will not come to eat other aftergrowths, for it is different from other aftergrowths, and we do not forbid the permitted on account of the forbidden. In any case, learn from this that for a vegetable we do not go by the picking at all, but by the majority of the growth, since aftergrowths of the sixth year that entered Sheviis are permitted. One can answer: granted that there we do not go by the picking, still we do not go by the budding either; rather, what grows under prohibition is forbidden, and what grows in permission is permitted — which is not so with an esrog and other trees, where we go entirely by the budding, so that if it budded under prohibition, even what grew afterwards in permission is forbidden. And so for Sheviis it is like a tree; for were it like a vegetable, we would go by the majority of the growth.

Notes

1. 1. Continues from [Kiddushin 2a]: why our Mishnah says האשה נקנית, the woman is acquired — the term kinyan (acquisition) is learned from the purchase of fields.
2. 2. Mekadesh (betroths) is from the word hekdesh, consecrated property: he makes her forbidden to everyone, as hekdesh is.
3. 3. A zav — a man who has a discharge. He is examined to see whether an outside cause brought it on; if so, he is tahor.
4. 4. The passage continues on [Kiddushin 3a].