Kiddushin 53 - October 5, 20 Tishrei

Study Guide Kiddushin 53 This week's daf is sponsored by Sarah Zahavi for the refuah shleima of Tinok ben Talia Nechama. Today's daf is sponsored by Tova and David Kestenbaum in honor of the birth of their grandson Naveh Eitan, son of their children Avital and Dvir Gamliel. "May he grow in Torah, mitzvot and good deeds." A braita states that the issue of whether a man can betroth a woman with his portion of the sacrificial items is a subject of debate between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosi - each derives his opinion from the same verse. Rabbi Yochanan held that RAbbi Yehuda eventually conceded to Rabbi Yosi and Rav held that he did not. Two braitot are brought - one to support Rabbi Yochanan and one to support Rav. However, the one brought to support Rav's position is rejected. Rabbi Meir holds that a man cannot betroth a woman with maaser sheni produce as it is considered property of God. This is derived from a verse understood to be referring to maaser sheni - how? In the case of a man who unwittingly betrothed a woman with maaser sheni, Rabbi Meir holds that the betrothal is not effective, and in the case of a man who unwittingly betrothed a woman with hekdesh, Rabbi Yehuda holds that the betrothal is not effective. Regarding both these cases, Rabbi Yaakov said that he learned from Rabbi Yochanan that one is because the woman doesn't want this and the other is because both the man and the woman don't want it, but he was unsure which was which. Rabbi Yirmia and Rabbi Yaakov himself each offer opposite suggestions as to which one matches which opinion. Rava explains that according to Rabbi Meir, if the man betrothed with hekdesh and the betrothal is ineffective, it is a sign that the money does not become unsanctified by his action. Rav Chisda rules that this would be the same regarding a sale using money of hekdesh unwittingly - since neither side would want the sale to go through once they realize the money was hekdesh, the sale is invalid, the money is returned and the sanctity remains in the money as the item was in the end not use for a non-sacred purpose. Accordingly, there would be no obligation to bring a sacrifice for meila, misuse of consecrated property. A braita is brought to raise a difficulty with this understanding of Rabbi Meir, but it is resolved.