WorksheetsBM27b#1
Total questions: 15
Worksheet time: 13mins
They asked in Beis Midrash:
Are Simonim From the Torah of the Rabanan?
If Simonim are from the Torah, why investigate the person providing Simonim?
If Simonim are only from the Rabanan Why are we stringent?
Are Simonim accepted?
If Simonim are from the Torah
Providing signs for a lost divorce document, is proof of being divorced. Can't divorce with it.
Providing signs for a lost divorce document, makes it usable for divorce.
Providing signs for a lost loan document, makes it usable to collect a debt. but not to lend money.
Providing signs is sufficient for money matters only.
According to the ת"ש אף השמלה the Torah writes שמלה (Garment) to teach:
Items with signs and claimants needs to be announced
Items with signs needs to be announced
Items that have claimants needs to be announced
All Items need to be announced
According to the refute of תנא תובעין, the Torah writes שמלה (Garment) to teach:
Items with signs and has claimants needs to be announced
Items with signs needs to be announced
Items that have claimants needs to be announced
All Items need to be announced
According to the ת"ש אף השמלה, the תנא mentions סימנים to teach:
Signs require an object to be announced from the Torah.
Signs require an object to be announced from the Rabbanan.
Signs require an object to be announced from the Torah only by monetary issues
According to the refutation תנא תובעין, the Torah writes שמלה (Garment) to teach:
Signs require an object to be announced according to Torah.
Signs are irrelevant even according to the Rabbanan.
Signs require an object to be announced according to Rabbanan.
Items with claimants needs to be announced, with or without signs.
ת״ש חֲמוֹר בְּסִימָנֵי אוכף indicates that סימנים are from the Torah because:
A donkey is returned by the signs of the saddle
The Torah writes חֲמוֹר to teach that saddle signs identify the donkey
It must be a גזירת הכתוב, otherwise one wont return the donkey thru the signs of the saddle.
חֲמוֹר teaches that a saddle identifies the donkey, we infer through signs.
The גמרא's response of אֵימָא בְּעֵדֵי אוכף explains:
possible, witnesses identify the saddle, not signs.
The saddle identification is by either witnesses or signs
The only identification of the saddle is by witnesses.
not necessarily do signs identify the saddle.
ת״ש וְהָיָה עִמְּךָ indicates that סימנים are from the Torah because:
The Torah writes, presenting signs proves who the owner is.
We assume, "דְּרוֹשׁ" in the Torah refers to presenting signs
The extra word דְּרוֹשׁ teaches, one needs סימנים to identify
The גמרא's response of לֹא בְעֵדִים explains:
"דְּרוֹשׁ" can be explained, that witnesses identify a cheater, not signs
The saddle identification is by either witnesses or signs,
The only identification of the saddle is by witnesses.
signs surely do not necessarily identify
In ת״ש חֲמוֹר and ת״ש וְהָיָה עִמְּךָ the prove that סימנים are מן התורה is:
Due to an assumption that one identifies thru סימנים
A clear teaching that one identifies thru סימנים
In the response that refutes the ת״ש חֲמוֹר and ת״ש וְהָיָה עִמְּךָ:
We can explain that the identification is thru witnesses
We Must explain that the identification is thru witnesses
The proof from ת"ש אף השמלה is:
That סימנים are from the Torah
That סימנים are from the Rabbanan
The proof from ת"ש חמור בסימני אוכף is:
That סימנים are from the Torah
That סימנים are from the Rabbanan
The proof from ת"ש וְהָיָה עִמְּךָ is:
That סימנים are from the Torah
That סימנים are from the Rabbanan
